Archived: Moorland Gardens Care Home

Updated 1 March 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.

The inspection took place on 16 November 2015 and it was unannounced. It was carried out by two inspectors and an 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.

Before the inspection, we reviewed information we held about the service. The service had recently re-registered under a new provider and we had not yet received any notifications from them. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us.

During the inspection, we spoke with 11 people who used the service, four visiting relatives, eight staff, the deputy manager, the registered manager and a visiting professional.

We reviewed the care records for 12 people who used the service. We checked how medicines and complaints were being managed. We reviewed the provider’s staff recruitment, supervision and training processes. We looked at information on how the quality of the service was monitored and managed and we observed care in communal areas of the home.

Updated 1 March 2016

We carried out an unannounced inspection on 16 November 2015. The service had recently been re-registered as the provider had changed.

The service provides care and support for up to 80 people, some of whom may be receiving short term rehabilitation care and treatment, living with dementia or chronic health conditions. On the day of our inspection, 46 people were being supported by the service.

There is a registered manager in post. 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 provider had effective systems in place and staff had been trained on how to safeguard people. There were individual risk assessments that gave guidance to staff on how risks to people could be minimised. People’s medicines had been managed safely and administered in a timely manner.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient staff to support people safely. The manager and staff understood their roles and responsibilities in ensuring that people consented to their care. Also, that care was provided in accordance with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) for people who lacked mental capacity to make informed decisions about their care. Staff had received effective training, support and supervision that enabled them to provide appropriate care to people who used the service.

People’s needs had been assessed and they had care plans that took account of their individual needs, preferences and choices. They were supported to have sufficient food and drinks, and had access to other health and social care services when required in order to maintain their health and wellbeing.

Staff were kind and caring towards people they supported. They treated people with respect and supported them to maintain their independence as much as possible. Some activities had been provided to occupy people within the home, but more needed to be done to support people to pursue their varied hobbies and interests outside of the home.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people or their representatives, and acted on the comments received to improve the quality of the service provided.

The registered manager provided stable leadership and effective support to the staff. The new deputy manager had new ideas to further improve the quality of the service provided. However, more needed to be done to change people’s perception that there was not always sufficient staff to provide the support they wanted. Quality monitoring processes had not always been used effectively to drive improvements.