Archived: Matthias House

Updated 25 February 2017

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.

Our inspection was unannounced and took place on 23 January 2017. The inspection was carried out by 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.

We asked the local authority their views on the service provided. We also reviewed the information we held about the service. Providers are required by law to notify us about events and incidents that occur; we refer to these as ‘notifications’. We looked at the notifications the provider had sent to us. We used the information we had gathered to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection.

We spoke with 12 people who lived at the home, eight relatives, one senior care staff member, four care staff, the cook, the registered manager and the hairdresser. We viewed care files for two people, recruitment records for four staff and training records. We looked at complaints systems, completed provider feedback forms and the processes the provider had in place to monitor the quality of the service.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk to us.

Updated 25 February 2017

Our inspection was unannounced and took place on 23 January 2017.

The home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to a maximum of 33 people. On the day of our inspection 27 people lived at the home. People who lived there had a range of conditions the majority of which related to old age.

At our last inspection of 21 December 2015 we determined that medicine management and overall governance required improvement. This inspection we found that improvements had been made. Recording relating to medicines management had improved to show that people had their medicines as they had been prescribed. More frequent audits had been undertaken and we had been notified of the issues we needed to be notified of.

The manager was registered with us. 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.

The staff had been trained and assessed to manage medicines safely. People who lived at the home felt safe. Staff were aware of the processes they should follow to minimise the risk of accidents. Systems were in place to protect people from the risk of harm and abuse. Staffing levels and skill mix ensured that people’s needs would be met.

Staff also felt supported in their job roles on a day to day basis. Staff felt that they were provided with the training that they required to ensure that they had the skills and knowledge to provide safe and appropriate care to people. People received care in line with their best interests and processes were in place to ensure they were not restricted unlawfully. People were happy with the meals offered. People were supported to have a nourishing diet and drinks were offered throughout the day to prevent the risk of dehydration. Health care services were accessed as needed to promote good health.

People and their relatives felt that the staff were caring and helpful. Interactions between staff and the people who lived at the home were positive. People were treated with dignity and their independence was promoted.

Activities for people were offered and encouraged. There were processes in place for people and their families to give their view on the service provided. A complaints system was available for people to use. People and their relatives confirmed that they would use the process if they had the need.

People and staff felt that the quality of service was good. The management of the service was stable. There were processes in place to monitor the quality of the service that identified any issues that needed improvement.