Gough House

Updated 24 July 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and one 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.

Service and service type

Gough House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

The first day of the inspection was unannounced. The second day of the inspection was announced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with ten people who used the service and three relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the, registered manager, one senior care worker, care workers and the chef.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with two professionals who regularly visit the service.

Updated 24 July 2019

About the service

Gough House is a residential care home providing personal care to 15 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 16 people.

Gough House is spread over three floors. The ground floor is made up of a lounge, dining room and bedrooms. The first and second floors are made up of bedrooms. There are communal bathing and toilet facilities on each floor. All floors can be accessed using a stairlift. The registered manager’s office is located on the first floor and there is a garden accessible to people. There is parking available to the front and rear of the building.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they received support from staff who were kind and caring. Relatives confirmed this. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. People were involved with the care planning process and decisions about their care. People were provided with support in the home and this continued if they were away from the home. People’s choices and independence were respected and encouraged by staff.

People’s needs were assessed, and care plans reflected these. People told us they were involved with planning their care. People were supported to eat and drink in ways that suited their individual needs and people spoke positively about the food provided by the service. When required, people were supported to access healthcare services and the staff worked effectively with these services to ensure good outcomes for people. People were encouraged to personalise their rooms, equipment was available if and when people required it. People’s consent was sought before they were supported by staff. People were supported to access activities that were relevant and meaningful for them.

People’s needs were responded to and people confirmed this. People told us they felt comfortable to complain but people we spoke with told us they didn’t need to complain. No-one using the service was receiving end of life care during our inspection.

People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered manager, the registered manager was visible in the home and accessible to people. People and relatives felt listened to and said communication with the service was good. Staff told us they worked as a team to achieve good outcomes for people and that people received good care. The registered manager used a programme of quality audits and checks to maintain oversight of the service. The registered manager was proud to have been nominated for an award and updated us after the inspection that a further five nominations had made it through to the ‘semi-finals’

People felt safe and told us they received care and support from competent staff in a safe way, people said there were sufficient levels of staff to meet their needs. People were protected from the risk of potential harm and abuse because staff were confident about understanding what abuse was, what it looked like and actions they would take if abuse was suspected. Risks were assessed and managed to ensure people were not placed at risk of avoidable harm. Medicines and creams were managed safely, this included the use of body maps for creams. People were protected from the spread of infection because staff wore personal protective equipment, the environment was clean and free from malodours. The provider learned from mistakes when things went wrong.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Rating at last inspection the last rating for this service was Good (Published January 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk