Sycamore House Care Home

Updated 26 January 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 7 January 2019, it was unannounced and was undertaken by one inspector.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). 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. We looked at the notifications we had received and reviewed all the intelligence the Care Quality Commission (CQC) held to help inform us about the level of risk present and make a judgement about this service.

During our inspection we looked at a variety of records including three people’s care records, three staff files, staff training, supervision, appraisal and recruitment documentation. We looked at records relating to the management of the service including policies and procedures, quality assurance documents, staff rotas, complaints and compliments. We spoke with the registered manager, two directors, administrator, chef and three care staff. We spoke with three people living at the service and with three relatives who were visiting to gain their views.

Some people living at the service were living with dementia and could not tell us about their experiences. We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people which included the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experiences of people who could not talk with us. This confirmed that people were supported appropriately by staff and provided us with evidence that staff understood people’s individual needs and preferences.

We asked the local authority commissioning and safeguarding team for their views prior to our inspection. We also contacted Healthwatch (a healthcare consumer champion) to ask if they had any feedback to share about this service.

Updated 26 January 2019

The inspection took place on 7 January 2019, it was unannounced. It was the first inspection of this location under this provider.

Sycamore House Care Home is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Sycamore House Care Home is registered to provide care and accommodation for a maximum of 36 people some of whom may be living with dementia. Accommodation was provided on ground level. The service is situated in Hull.

A registered manager was in place. 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.

Minor infection control issues found during the inspection were addressed straight away. People told us they felt safe living at the service. Staff understood how to identify signs of abuse and harm, and issues were reported appropriately.

Staff understood the risks present to people’s health and wellbeing and they gained advice from relevant health care professionals to minimise these risks. There were sufficient numbers of competent staff to meet people’s needs. Medicine management was robust and general maintenance and improvements to the environment were undertaken.

Accidents and incidents were monitored. Staff understood the action they must take in the event of an emergency to protect people’s health and safety.

Staff completed training and received supervision and a yearly appraisal to maintain and develop their skills. Performance issues were addressed.

People told us staff were caring and kind and they protected their privacy and dignity. People’s diversity was protected and their communication needs were recorded. Information was provided to people in a format that met their needs. Advocates were available for people to help them raise their views. People’s confidentiality was maintained and care records were stored securely, in line with current data protection legislation.

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s full and current needs. They worked as a team to support people. People’s care records contained relevant information to ensure their holistic needs could be met. Staff promoted people’s independence even if there were risks present to maintain people’s independence and choice.

People were offered a choice of food and drink and their special dietary needs were provided for.

Care and support was provided in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where people did not have the capacity to make decisions about their care best interest meetings were held with relatives and health care professionals. This helped to protect people’s rights.

Staff accessed health services to help to maintain people’s health and wellbeing. People received person-centred care and support. A programme of activities was provided.

There was a complaints policy in place and the provider welcomed feedback from people living at the service, relatives and staff. Issues raised were investigated and this information was used to maintain or improve the service.

The management team were open and transparent. Checks and audits took place and the infection control audit was strengthened during the inspection to prevent minor infection control issues from re-occurring. The service was being improved and enhanced by the management team. Further environmental improvements were scheduled to take place and people’s views were sought and were acted upon. Maintenance checks and servicing of equipment took place to help to protect the health and safety of all parties.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.