Archived: Thackley Green

Updated 29 June 2018

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 was an unannounced comprehensive inspection, which took place on 22 May 2018. The inspection team comprised of one inspector 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. In this instance, our expert-by-experience had cared for an older relative.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return [PIR]. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The provider completed and returned the PIR in March 2018 and we considered this when we made judgements in this report. We also reviewed other information that we held about the service such as notifications, which are events that happened in the service that the provider is required to tell us about, and information that had been sent to us by other agencies.

We spoke with the local authority that have commissioning and monitoring roles with the service. We also contacted Healthwatch for their information about the service. Healthwatch is a consumer organisation that has statutory powers to ensure the voice of the consumer is strengthened and heard by those who commission, deliver and regulate health and care services.

During our inspection, we spoke with 11 people who used the service, 11 members of staff, which included a nurse, two team leaders, four care assistants, a cook, the deputy manager and the registered manager. We also spoke with one person’s friend who was visiting at the time of the inspection and a health professional.

We spent time observing people to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at the care records of three people to see whether they reflected the care given and three staff recruitment records. We looked at other information related to the running of and the quality of the service. This included quality assurance audits, training information for care staff, minutes of meetings with staff and arrangements for managing complaints.

Updated 29 June 2018

Thackley Green Specialist Care Centre (the Centre) is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The Centre is located in a residential area of Corby and is registered to provide accommodation for up to 51 older people who require nursing care and rehabilitation. People staying at the Centre had a range of specialist needs including those living with dementia and some who had physical and sensory disabilities. The service provides respite care and rehabilitation for those people who may be recovering from surgery or illness. There are two floors, the first floor was for people with nursing needs and the ground floor was for people living with dementia and those who required social rehabilitation. At the time of our inspection there were 25 people staying there.

At the last inspection in May 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection

People’s individuality was respected and people continued to be treated with empathy and kindness. The staff were friendly, caring and compassionate. Positive therapeutic relationships had been developed between the people and staff.

Detailed personalised care plans were in place, which enabled staff to provide consistent care and support in line with people’s personal preferences, choices and needs. People were enabled and encouraged to remain as independent as possible.

People continued to receive safe care. Staff were appropriately recruited and there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. People were protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.

The care that people received continued to be effective and positive outcomes for people were being achieved. Staff had access to the support, supervision and training that they required to work effectively in their roles. Development of staff knowledge and skills was encouraged. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition and reach their full potential.

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 Centre supported this practice. Activities were geared around individual plans and people had opportunities to join in group activities if they wished to. Family and friends were welcomed and supported.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The provider was committed to develop the service and actively looked at ways to continuously improve the service. There were effective quality assurance systems and audits in place; action was taken to address any shortfalls.

People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the provider had implemented effective systems to manage any complaints that they may receive.