Archived: York House

Updated 23 June 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 5 May 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two adult social care 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. The expert by experience on this occasion had experience of working in health and social care.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service and we spoke with the local authority contracting team. We had not sent the provider a ‘Provider Information Return’ (PIR) form prior to the inspection. This form enables the provider to submit in advance information about their service to inform the inspection.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who lived in the home. We spent time in the lounge and dining room areas observing the care and support people received. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI), SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We also looked at five care plans and associated records such as daily notes and medication administration records, three staff recruitment files, the training matrix and we reviewed records relating to quality assurance and audits, policies and procedures and other records relating to the day to day operation of the home. We spoke with seven people who lived at the home and four relatives of people who used the service. We also spoke with the operations manager, registered manager, manager, deputy manager, two senior carers, two carers, a cook, a domestic and an agency care worker.

Updated 23 June 2016

The inspection of York House took place on 5 May 2016 and was unannounced. We previously inspected the service on 16 July 2014. The service was not in breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 regulations at that time.

York House is a purpose built care home providing care for up to a maximum of 36 older people some of whom are living with dementia. The home stands in its own grounds with an enclosed garden and car parking. On the day of our inspection 35 people were living at the home.

The service had a registered manager in place. They were the registered manager for two locations and the deputy manager had been managing the home since October 2015 due to the registered manager concentrating their time at another location. A new manager had recently been appointed for York House. It was their second day of employment when we inspected the home. 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.

People who lived at the home told us they felt safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable people and understood the action they should take in the event a person was at risk of harm or abuse.

Risk assessments were in place for people although due to the style of the document the information recorded did not always contain much detail.

Staff recruitment was thorough and included a number of pre-employment checks to ensure potential candidates were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Medicines were managed and administered safely to people by staff who had relevant knowledge and skills.

The registered provider had a system in place to ensure staff received an induction and training when they commenced employment and training was periodically refreshed for all staff. There was an on-going programme of supervision and appraisal although this was behind schedule due to the management changes.

Our discussion with the manager and staff showed they had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how they would act in people’s best interests if they lacked capacity to make decisions.

People were supported to eat and drink and were enabled to choose which meal they would like to eat. We observed lunch time on the day of our inspection, people enjoyed their meal and we found the atmosphere to be relaxed.

Everyone we spoke with told us staff were caring and kind. During our inspection we observed staff interactions with people were friendly but professional. Staff supported people to make choices and decisions for example when they got up, went to bed and what they had to eat and drink.

The post of activities organiser was currently vacant although some activities were still being provided for people who lived at the home.

Peoples care plans were person centred, recording likes and dislikes. Care plans were reviewed and updated at regular intervals.

People told us they knew how to complain in the event they were dissatisfied with the service.

The home was undergoing a management change but staff felt supported and the registered provider had ensured management support was provided for the home. There was a system in place to continually assess and monitor the safety and quality of the service provided however, this was not always completed regularly.