Peartree House

Updated 8 June 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 was a routine, unannounced comprehensive inspection which took place on 1 and 2 February 2018.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector, inspection manager and 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.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we had about the service, including previous inspection reports and notifications the provider sent to us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

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.

We spoke with seven people who lived at Peartree House, and five visiting family members. We observed care and support people received in the shared area of the home, including part of a medicines round.

We spoke with the registered manager, the owners, and other members of staff, including three support workers, two registered nurses, the matron and their deputy, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and a speech and language therapist employed by the service. We spoke with members of the administration and catering teams, and a visiting healthcare professional.

We looked at the care plans and associated records of five people. We reviewed other records, including the provider’s policies and procedures, internal checks and audits, the provider’s improvement action plan, quality assurance survey returns and reports, training and supervision records, medicine administration records, mental capacity assessments, Deprivation of Liberty applications and authorisations, staff rotas, and recruitment records for six staff members.

Updated 8 June 2018

The inspection took place on 1 and 2 February 2018. It was unannounced.

Peartree House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. We regulate both the premises and the care provided, and looked at both during this inspection.

Peartree House specialises in the rehabilitation of people recovering from an acquired brain injury. It can accommodate up to 46 people in an adapted listed building with annexe accommodation for people with greater independence. At the time of the inspection there were 35 people living in the home and annexe with a further two people supported in their own homes.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with us 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 provider had arrangements in place to protect people from risks to their safety and welfare, including the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Staffing levels were sufficient to support people safely. Recruitment processes were in place to make sure the provider only employed workers who were suitable to work in a care setting. There were arrangements in place to store and administer medicines safely, and to manage the risk of infection. There was a culture that encouraged learning from experience.

People’s assessments, rehabilitation and care plans were based on appropriate professional standards and guidance. Staff received appropriate training and supervision to maintain and develop their skills and knowledge to support people according to their needs. Staff were aware of and put into practice the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their health and welfare. People were supported to access healthcare services, such as GPs and specialist nurses. The provider had adapted the home to accommodate people recovering from brain injury.

Care workers had developed caring relationships with people they supported. People were encouraged and supported to take part in decisions about their care and support and their views were listened to. Staff actively respected people’s independence, privacy, and dignity.

Care and support were based on assessments and plans which took into account people’s abilities, needs and preferences. People were able to take part in leisure activities which reflected their interests. People were kept aware of the provider’s complaints procedure, and the provider dealt with complaints in a professional manner.

The home had a warm, welcoming atmosphere. Systems were in place to make sure the service was managed efficiently and to monitor and assess the quality of service provided.