Archived: Saffron House

Updated 25 May 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 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.

We inspected the service on 4 April 2017. The inspection was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and an expert by experience (ExE). An ExE is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection visit the provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give key information about the service, to detail what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. Before our inspection visit we also reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and notifications sent to us by the provider. Notifications tell us about important events which the service is required to tell us by law. We contacted a local authority who had funding responsibility for some of the people who were using the service. We also contacted Healthwatch Leicestershire who are the local consumer champion for people using adult social care services to see if they had feedback about the service.

As part of our inspection we observed staff and people’s interactions and how the staff supported people. Our observations supported us to determine how staff interacted with people who used the service, and how people responded to the interactions.

During our inspection visit we met and spoke with six people who used the service and with five relatives. We spoke with nine members of staff including support staff, a kitchen assistant, the person who oversees the maintenance for the building, a team leader, the deputy manager, the registered manager and the area manager. We looked at the care records of five people who used the service, people’s medicine records, staff training records, three staff recruitment files and the provider’s quality assurance documentation. Following the inspection visit we spoke with a health professional who had regular contact with the service to gain their feedback.

Updated 25 May 2017

This inspection visit took place on 4 April 2017 and was unannounced.

Saffron House provides residential care for older people, some of whom were living with dementia when we visited. It is registered to accommodate up to 48 people. There were 37 people using the service on the day of our inspection visit.

At our last inspection carried out on 23 June 2016 we found that the provider had not met the regulations relating to safeguarding people from abuse, staffing and good governance. They had also failed to notify us of significant events that had occurred at the service. They wrote to us to tell us how they intended to make the required improvements. At this inspection we found that the provider had made the required improvements.

The service had a registered manager. 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 and their relatives confirmed this. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from avoidable harm. The provider had followed safe recruitment practices.

Risk associated with activities of people’s care had been assessed and measures were in place to prevent avoidable harm. The environment and equipment was checked and maintained in order to keep people safe.

There was a suitable number of staff when we visited. The provider checked that staffing numbers remained sufficient.

People received their medicines as prescribed by their doctor. People were supported to maintain their health and had access to health professionals.

People were supported by staff who had received training and support to meet their needs. Staff felt supported and their competency in their role was checked.

People enjoyed their meals and were supported to have enough to eat and drink. Where people had dietary requirements, these were met and staff understood how to provide these.

People were supported in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act. People’s mental capacity to consent to their care had been assessed where there was a reasonable belief that they may not be able to make a specific decision.

Staff at all levels treated people with kindness and compassion. Dignity and respect for people was promoted. People felt valued and that they were listened to.

People’s care needs had been assessed and were reviewed to make sure that they continued to meet their needs.

People’s independence was promoted and people were encouraged to make choices. They had access to activities so that they could remain active and follow their interests.

The registered manager had sought feedback from people and their relatives about the service that they received. We saw that they had taken action based on this feedback. The provider’s complaints procedure had been followed when a concern had been raised and people felt able to make a complaint if they needed to.

Staff felt supported. They were clear on their role and the expectations of them.

People and their relatives felt the service was well led. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided and to drive improvement.

The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to CQC and external agencies.