6 February 2017
During a routine inspection
At the last inspection on 9 and 18 February 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
At the last inspection we asked the provider to make improvements to care plans. We found this action had been completed. Care plans were personalised and provided information about the care each person required. They had also been evaluated to help keep them up to date. People’s needs had been assessed.
Improvements had been made to falls monitoring and other audits were being completed.
During this inspection we found the provider did not have a process for reviewing food and fluid charts. We have made a recommendation about this. Care plan audit records were not available during the inspection.
The home had a registered manager. People, relatives and care workers gave us positive feedback about the registered manager.
People and relatives said they received good care. They told us care workers were kind, considerate and treated them with dignity and respect.
People, relatives and care workers confirmed the home was a safe place to live. Care workers understood the importance of safeguarding people and knew how to use the whistle blowing procedure if required. Care workers confirmed they had not needed to use the procedure previously. Medicines were managed appropriately.
There were enough care workers on duty to meet people’s needs. Some relatives told us they felt night time staffing levels were insufficient. We carried out an out of hours inspection check on the staffing levels. We found care workers were usually able to meet people’s needs quickly. Care workers told us night time staffing levels were fine and the registered manager sought their views regularly. Health and safety checks were carried out regularly.
Care workers told us they received good support and had completed the training they needed. Records confirmed supervisions, appraisals and essential training were up to date. People were supported to meet their nutritional needs and to access the healthcare they needed.
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.
People had opportunities to participate in activities. These included outings to the garden centre, shopping, Beamish Museum and the beach. Where people chose not to take part their decision was respected.
Regular residents’ meetings took place and people had been consulted to gather their views about the home.
People and relatives told us they knew how to complain but did not have any concerns. One complaint had been received which had been fully investigated and resolved.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.