Sussex Grange Residential Care Home

Updated 14 August 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 was 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 13 June 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by 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 service.

Before the inspection we checked information that we held about the home and the service provider. This included information from other agencies and statutory notifications sent to us by the registered manager about events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with nine people who lived at the home and three relatives. We spoke with three care staff, the chef, the registered manager and the provider. We also spoke to a community nurse from the NHS admissions avoidance team who gave us permission for their views to be included in this report.

We spent time observing the care and support people received in communal areas of the home. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) which is a way of observing care to help us understand the experiences of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at the care plans and associated records for four people. We reviewed other records, including the provider’s internal checks and audits, staff training records, staff rotas, accidents, incidents, records of medicines administered to people and complaints. We looked at staff training records and staff supervision records.

Updated 14 August 2018

This inspection took place on 13 June 2018 and was unannounced.

Sussex Grange Residential Care Home is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to 20 older people and there were 17 people living at the home at the time of the inspection. Sussex Grange Care Home is an older style building which has been adapted to a care home. There is a passenger lift so people can access the first floor. All bedrooms are single and have an en-suite toilet. There is a lounge and separate dining room as well as gardens and outdoor space for people to sit.

At our last inspection we rated the service 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.

We made a requirement at the last inspection regarding the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as the provider and registered manager were not following the correct procedures when people did not have capacity to consent to their care and treatment. The provider sent us an action plan to say how this was being addressed. At this inspection we found the provider, registered manager and staff had a good awareness of the MCA. Where it was believed people might not have capacity, this was now appropriately assessed and ‘best interests’ decision making procedures implemented when needed. The provider had met this regulation.

People and their relatives spoke highly of the service. For example, one person told us, “As a home, it’s excellent. The food’s excellent , the care’s excellent. We are very well looked after here. I say, 'The Queen couldn’t be treated better.’”

People said they felt safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding procedures and had a good awareness of the importance of protecting people. Risks to people were assessed and action taken to mitigate these.

Medicines were safely managed. Sufficient numbers of staff were provided and checks were made on the suitability of new staff to work in a care setting. The service was clean and hygienic. Reviews of care and incidents took place.

Care staff were supported well and had access to a range of training courses including nationally recognised qualifications in care.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed. There was a choice of food and specialist diets were catered for. People said they liked the food.

The premises were safe, clean and hygienic and suitable for older people.

Staff treated people with kindness and promoted people’s privacy and dignity. Staff demonstrated they had a value base of treating people equally irrespective of their age or disability. Staff knew the importance of providing care and support to people which was individualised and person centred.

People received responsive care to meet their individual needs and preferences. People’s needs were assessed and people were involved in decisions about their care. There was a range of activities for people which they enjoyed as well as access to community facilities.

There was an effective complaints procedure and people and their relatives said they felt able to raise any concerns of issues which were responded to.

The provider had links with local services for people who were at the end of their life. People’s preferences for end of life care were recorded.

The service was well-led with an open culture. There was an emphasis on involving people and relatives in the home and for seeking their views. Staff were supported to develop their skills and knowledge and promoted person centred care. The provider and staff worked well with other agencies to improve the standard of care people received and to meet their changing needs. There was a system of checks and audits regarding the safety and quality of the service provided.