Archived: Clanfield Residential Home

Updated 23 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.

This unannounced inspection was carried out by an inspector and expert-by-experience. The inspection took place on the 27 July 2016. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before our inspection, we reviewed information we held about the provider including, for example, statutory notifications that they had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We contacted the health and social care commissioners who help place and monitor the care of people living in the home that have information about the quality of the service.

We took into account people’s experience of receiving care by listening to what they had to say. During this inspection we spoke in private with eight people who used the service, as well as three family visitors to the home. We looked at the care records of six people. We spoke with the deputy manager who was in charge when we inspected and five staff. We looked at four records in relation to staff recruitment and training, as well as records related to quality monitoring of the service by the provider.

We undertook general observations throughout the home, including observing interactions between staff and people in the communal areas. We observed the care and support provided for people in the dining room during lunchtime.

Updated 23 August 2016

This unannounced inspection took place on the 27 July 2016.

Clanfield accommodates and cares for up to 30 older persons with a range of mainly age related dependencies, including people with dementia care needs. There were 26 people in residence when we inspected.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

People were safe. Their needs were assessed before they were admitted to the home and regularly reviewed to ensure they received appropriate and timely care. They also benefited from being cared for by sufficient numbers of experienced staff that had received the training they needed to do their job safely. Staff knew what was expected of them when caring for older people, including those with dementia care needs, and they carried out their duties effectively and with compassion.

People were safeguarded from abuse and poor practice by staff that knew what action they needed to take if they suspected this was happening. There were recruitment procedures in place that protected people from receiving care from staff that were unsuited to the job.

People’s medicines were appropriately and safely managed. Medicines were securely stored and there were suitable arrangements in place for their timely administration. People’s healthcare needs were met and they received treatment from other community based healthcare professionals when this was necessary.

People’s individual nutritional needs were assessed, monitored and met with appropriate guidance from healthcare professionals that was acted upon when required. People had enough to eat and drink and enjoyed their meals. People that needed support with eating and drinking received the timely practical help they required. Sometimes staff, however, needed to be better at keeping people with dementia informed about their meal, such as describing what was on the plate even if the person’s comprehension of what was said had been compromised by their condition.

People’s individual preferences for the way they liked to receive their care and support were respected. People’s care needs had been assessed prior to admission and they each had an agreed care plan that reflected their individual needs. Their care plans were regularly reviewed and provided staff with the information and guidance they needed to do their job. People were enabled to do things for themselves by staff that were attentive to each person’s individual needs and understood their capabilities. People received support from staff that demonstrated that they understood what was required of them to provide people with the care they needed. Staff were caring, friendly, and attentive, although at times they could be better at engaging people in spontaneous conversation as they passed through communal areas.

People were treated with dignity and their right to make choices was upheld. There were imaginative activities to keep people entertained and constructively occupied if they chose to participate in them. People were kept informed of organised activities and were encouraged to make suggestions about what they wanted to do so plans could be made.

People’s views about the quality of their service were sought and acted upon. The quality of the service provided was regularly audited so that people benefitted from any improvements that were made. People and their relatives or significant others were assured that if they were dissatisfied with the quality of the service they would be listened to and that appropriate action would be taken to resolve matters to their satisfaction.