Archived: Oliver Court

The service has a registered manager but an acting manager has been appointed to cover while the registered manager is on long term leave. 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.

People were safe and lived in a safe environment because staff knew how to recognise signs of possible abuse and knew the correct procedures for reporting concerns. In addition, there were enough well trained staff to support people and appropriate recruitment checks were carried out before staff began working in the home. The premises were well maintained and any safety issues were rectified promptly.

Identified risks to people’s safety were recorded on an individual basis and there was guidance for staff to be able to know how to support people safely and effectively. Medicines were managed and administered safely in the home and people received their medicines as prescribed.

People were supported effectively by staff who were skilled and knowledgeable in their work and all new members of staff completed an induction. Staff were supported well by the acting manager and the management team as a whole.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. The acting manager understood the requirements of the MCA.

People had enough to eat and drink and enjoyed their meals. If needed, people’s intake of food and drinks would be monitored and recorded. Prompt action and timely referrals were made to relevant healthcare professionals when any needs or concerns were identified.

Staff in the home were caring and attentive. People were treated with respect and staff preserved people’s dignity. Visitors were welcome and people were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible. People were also able to follow pastimes or hobbies of their choice.

Assessments were completed prior to admission, to ensure people’s needs could be met. People were involved in planning their care and received care and support that was individual to their needs. Risk assessments detailed what action was required or had been carried out to remove or minimise any identified risks.

People were able to voice their concerns or make a complaint if needed and were listened to with appropriate responses and action taken where possible.

The service was well run and people’s needs were being met appropriately. Communication between the acting manager, staff, people living in the home and visitors was frequent and effective.

There were a number of systems in place in order to ensure the quality of the service provided was regularly monitored and regular audits were carried out by the acting manager in order to identify any areas that needed improvement.

We spoke with two people who used the service. Everyone we spoke with was satisfied with the care and treatment that they had received. One person told us, 'They (care staff) involve you and ask you what you think.' Another said, 'We have meetings where we get to talk about what we like and don't like. I like that it makes me feel important, like I am someone.'

We spoke with three staff and the manager. We saw that staff were provided with a range of training to equip them to meet the needs of the people who used the service. Two of the staff members we spoke with had recently been employed by the service. They explained the programme of induction and training they had been supported with. They told us this meant that they were confident in meeting the care and treatment needs of people who used the service. All of the staff we spoke with told us they received regular supervision support meetings with their manager and that team meetings were held on a regular basis.

During our inspection we looked at a range of records. These included care records, correspondence in support of multi-agency working, staff meeting minutes, resident meeting minutes and health and safety checks. The majority of records we looked at were clear and up to date.

As part of our inspection we looked at how information in medication administration records and care notes for people living in the service supported the safe handling of their medicines. We saw that the provider had implemented a system for the monitoring of medication errors and updated the service's medication policy to provide staff with the guidance on what to do in the event of a medication error and who to go to for advice. However, we found that the provider's system for receiving and auditing people's medicines was not robust enough to safeguard the people who used the service.

One person spoken with told us, 'There is no them and us here, staff treat you like a human being.' Another person told us, 'I have lived in other homes and this is by far the best.'

We found that care plans were comprehensive and person centred. These contained details of the needs of people who used the service and how these needs were met.

We spoke with three staff members of staff, the manager and the deputy manager. The staff told us they received training and support from their manager. They told us how they worked well as a team.

We found shortfalls in the management monitoring of medicines.