Archived: Gedling Village Court

Updated 17 August 2016

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.

We visited the service on 12 July 2016, this was an unannounced inspection. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Prior to our inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports, information received and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also contacted commissioners (who fund the care for some people) of the service and asked them for their views.

During our inspection we spoke with all four people who used the service, one relative, two members of care staff, an activities coordinator, the deputy manager and the registered manager. We looked at the care plans of three people and any associated daily records. We looked at four staff files as well as a range of other records relating to the running of the service, such as audits, maintenance records and medicine administration records.

Updated 17 August 2016

This inspection took place on 12 July 2016 and was unannounced. Gedling Village Court provides accommodation and personal care for up to 13 people. On the day of our inspection 4 people were using the service who had a variety of needs associated with dementia and physical health conditions.

The service 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.

When we last visited the service in January 2015 we found the provider was not meeting the legal requirements in respect of having sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people's needs. During this inspection we found that sufficient improvements had been made, there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff and people’s needs were met in a timely way.

Risks to people’s health and safety were not always properly assessed and steps to mitigate risks had not always been taken. This was a breach of Regulation 12 and you can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report. People felt safe living at the home and staff were aware of how to protect people from the risk of abuse. People received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff had not received all of the training that would enable them to provide effective care. Staff felt supported and received supervision of their work. People enjoyed the food and were provided with sufficient to eat and drink. People received support from healthcare professionals, such as their GP, when needed. However, referrals to more specialist services had not always been made.

People were asked for their consent, however they had not had the opportunity to sign their records to confirm their consent. The Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) was utilised in order to protect people who were not able to make their own decisions about the care they received.

There were positive relationships between staff and people who lived at the home. People got on well with the staff who cared for them. The day to day decisions people made about what they wanted to do were respected by staff. People were treated with dignity and respect and their right to privacy was upheld.

People were provided with person-centred care and staff understood their needs, although their care plans were not always up to date. There was a range of activities available which people appeared to enjoy. Some people commented that they would like to go out of the home more and work was underway to improve the provision of activities. People knew how to complain and told us they felt comfortable approaching the registered manager and staff.

When we last visited the service in January 2015 we found the provider was not meeting the legal requirements in respect of having effective quality monitoring systems in place. During this inspection we saw that, while some improvements had been made, further work was required to enable the quality monitoring systems to be fully effective. The quality monitoring systems used did not always identify issues or result in improvements to the service people received. Staff did not always maintain accurate records about the care people needed or the care they had provided.

There was an open and relaxed culture in the home and the registered manager led by example. People were asked for their opinion about the service they received and their suggestions were acted upon.