Background to this inspection
Updated
1 March 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team: The service was inspected by one inspector.
Service and service type: Acacia Court is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. 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 inspection was unannounced on the first day. We told the registered manager we would be returning for the second day.
What we did: Before our inspection we looked at information we held about the service. The provider had completed a Provider Information Return form (PIR). A PIR is a form we ask providers to submit annually detailing what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make. We reviewed information stored on our database, such as notifications that the registered manager is required, by law, to submit to us as and when incidents occurred. We also reviewed information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority, members of the public and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.
We spoke with three people and one relative during our inspection. We also spoke with three staff, the activity coordinator, the cook, the administrator and the registered manager. We received feedback from one health and social care professional. Following our visit, we spoke with one person's relative by telephone.
We reviewed three people's care records. We looked at the medication administration records (MARs) for all people who used the service. We also looked at documentation relating to the management of the service which included, policies and procedures, training records and staff recruitment records.
Updated
1 March 2019
About the service: Acacia Court Care Home is a residential care home that was providing personal care to 32 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.
People’s experience of using this service: People and their relatives gave positive feedback about the care they received, and their experience of the service. Staff showed genuine dedication to deliver care in a person-centred way, based on people's preferences.
The provider ensured robust recruitment procedures were in place and followed. Staff had received appropriate training and support to enable them to carry out their roles effectively and safely. Staff received supervision and appraisal of their work performance. There were enough staff to meet people's needs and people's rights, privacy and dignity were maintained at all times.
People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff had completed training in how to safeguard people and risk assessments were completed to identify potential hazards. Lessons were learnt about accidents and incidents and these were shared with staff, to reduce the risk of further occurrences.
Medicines were managed safely. People were supported and encouraged to manage their medication independently.
Care plans described the support people needed. These included information and guidance from external healthcare professionals. People's dietary needs and preferences were met. People were positive about the food at the service.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Complaints were managed in line with the provider's policy. People and their relatives were provided with information on how to complain.
People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive improvement. Effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided through a range of internal checks and audits. The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to the CQC and external agencies.
Rating at last inspection: The service was last rated Good (published 10 August 2016). For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up: Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our inspection schedule for those services rated Good. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.