Archived: Botham Hall Care Home

Updated 15 March 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 29 and 30 January 2018; the first day was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of three adult social care inspectors and one ‘expert by experience’ on the first day of inspection. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. On the second day the team comprised of two adult social care inspectors.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

To prepare for the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service and requested feedback from other stakeholders. These included Healthwatch Kirklees, the local authority safeguarding team, the local authority infection prevention and control team, and the Clinical Commissioning Group. We spoke with one visiting healthcare professional during the inspection and one other by telephone after the inspection.

During this inspection we spoke with eight people who lived at the home and seven of their relatives to obtain their views of the support provided. We spoke with eight members of staff which included three care workers, the registered manager, the regional manager for the registered provider, the deputy manager, an administrative assistant, and the temporary cook.

We spent time observing care in the communal lounge and dining room areas on both floors in order to help us understand the experience of people using the service who could not express their views to us.

We reviewed a range of records which included eight people’s care files. We also inspected three staff members’ recruitment and supervision documents, staff training records, four people’s medicines administration records, accident and incident records, and various other documentation related to the running of the service.

Updated 15 March 2018

We inspected Botham Hall Care Home (known to people using the service, their relatives and staff as Botham Hall) on 29 and 30 January 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced which meant the home did not know we were coming.

Botham Hall is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to 40 older people, some of whom live with dementia. There were 36 people living at the home at the time of the inspection. The home has two floors. Eight bedrooms on each floor were ensuite; each floor also had communal bathrooms, a lounge and dining area. The first floor of the home was designed especially for people living with dementia.

Botham Hall is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We identified some concerns relating to the administration and storage of medicines at Botham Hall. These were immediately addressed by the registered manager. All other aspects of medicines management were safe.

Contingency arrangements for the lift, which was broken at the time of this inspection, required improvement.

People told us they felt safe. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been assessed and managed. The registered manager analysed incidents in order to learn lessons and make improvements.

The home was clean and odour-free.

Sufficient staff were deployed to meet people’s needs. Recruitment procedures in place were robust.

Records showed, and staff told us, they received the training and supervision they needed to provide people with effective care.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they liked the food and drinks served at the home was positive. The registered manager had taken action to address concerns about the quality of service provided by the catering company which ran the home’s kitchen.

Staff at Botham Hall worked well together as a team. People were supported to meet their wider health needs.

People and their relatives liked the décor of the home. We saw adaptations had been made to better suit the environment for people living with dementia.

People and relatives told us staff at Botham Hall were kind and caring. All interactions between staff and people we observed during the inspection were respectful and supportive.

Staff could describe people well as individuals. Information about people’s personal histories and preferences had been recorded.

We saw staff supported people to make their own decisions by offering them choices. People had been involved in developing their care plans and had access to advocates if they needed support with decision-making.

The registered manager promoted an open and inclusive culture which ensured people’s diverse needs were met.

People’s care plans contained the information staff needed to meet people’s care and treatment needs. Staff had received training on end of life care and the home had achieved accreditation in end of life care.

People’s care plans contained information about their communication needs in line with the Accessible Information Standard. The registered manager planned to review the guidance and implement any further requirements.

Feedback about activities at Botham Hall was positive. At the time of this inspection activities were provided by coordinators three days. The registered manager was trying to recruit an activities coordinator for the other four days and had asked care workers to provide more activities in the meantime.

One formal complaint had been received since the last inspection and this had been managed by the registered provider. A complaints policy was displayed; both people and relatives said they would speak to the registered manager if they had any problems.

People and their relatives told us Botham Hall was well-managed. Feedback about the registered manager was positive.

A system of audits to monitor the quality and safety of the service was in place which was overseen by both the registered manager and registered provider.

The service worked in partnership with stakeholders and individuals. People, their relatives and staff were asked for feedback about the service and how to improve it.

The registered manager promoted the vision and values of the registered provider and ensured staff worked in accordance with them.