Background to this inspection
Updated
11 February 2016
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 inspection took place on 16 December 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection team was made up of two adult social care inspectors. As part of our planning we reviewed the information that we held about the home including statutory notifications received from the provider. These statutory notifications include important events and occurrences which the provider is required to send to us by law. We reviewed previous inspection reports and we contacted the local authority contract monitoring team to gather further information. The registered manager had not received a Provider Information Return (PIR) before our inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make. However this information was gathered during the inspection.
During the inspection we spoke with 17 people who lived at the home, five visitors and one visiting health professional. We also spoke with staff including the registered manager, the administrator, a senior care assistant, two care assistants, the maintenance person and the cook.
Throughout the inspection we made observations of the care and support provided to people, including how the staff interacted with the people and made a specific observation of the way that people were supported during lunchtime. We completed a tour of the home and inspected bathrooms, toilets, communal area and some people’s bedrooms with their permission. We examined a number of records relating to the day to day management of the service including three staff files, staff rota's, quality audits, meeting minutes, training records, supervision records, call bell response times and maintenance records. We also inspected three of the care records of people living at the home.
Updated
11 February 2016
We carried out an inspection of Turnpike Court on 16 December 2015 and the inspection was unannounced. Turnpike Court provides accommodation and personal care for up to 28 people, at the time of our inspection there were 27 people living at the home. The home is situated in Elworth, near Sandbach in Cheshire, close to local facilities. The home is a two-storey building, with accommodation on the ground floor, the first floor being used as training rooms. There are 28 bedrooms, thirteen of which have en-suite toilet facilities. There are two large open plan lounges and a dining room, with extra seating in the connecting areas between the lounges.
At the time of the inspection there was a home manager in post, who had recently transferred there from another CLS location in October 2015. She had made an application to the Care Quality Commission to become the registered manager and was awaiting the outcome of this application. 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.
The manager was available for part of the inspection and engaged positively with the inspection process. The manager was friendly and approachable; she operated an open door policy for people using the service, staff and visitors.
People told us that they felt safe and told us that they received the support that they needed, in a way that respected their wishes. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet the needs of people. We noted that the current arrangements for staff breaks over the lunchtime period should be reviewed to ensure that maximum staff were available during this busy period. The manager assured us that the tool made available by the provider to calculate the numbers of staff required based on the needs of the people using the service would be fully implemented.
The provider had recently recruited a number of new staff members, which meant that the use of agency staff would no longer be required. Staff members had a thorough induction process when joining the service, as well as regular on-going training.
Staff had an understanding of the abuse and safeguarding procedures which should be followed to report abuse and people had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as possible. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service.
People's consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act were met.
People were able to choose the food and drink that they wanted and staff supported people with this.
People told us that they were well cared for and treated with compassion. Staff supported people in a caring manner. They knew the people they were supporting well and understood their requirements for care. People were treated with dignity and respect.
Care records were personalised and up to date; they reflected the support that people needed so that staff could understand how to care for the person appropriately. We noted that some of the life plans held more detailed information than others; the manager told us that this had already been identified as an area for further improvement. We saw that staff responded to people’s changing needs and sought involvement from outside health professionals as required.
People were able to take part in a range of activities should they choose to. An activities organiser arranged an entertainment programme and also provided one to one support to individuals.
The home was well led. There were good quality assurance systems in place, to enable areas for improvement to be identified