Archived: Scarbrough Court

Updated 14 April 2015

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 was carried out over two days. We visited the service unannounced on 15 December 2014 with two inspectors, a specialist advisor in nursing care 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. A further announced visit was made on 13 January 2015 to complete the inspection.

Before the inspection, the registered provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the registered provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information we held about the home, in particular notifications about incidents, accidents and safeguarding matters. We contacted the commissioners of the service, the local safeguarding adults’ team and the local Healthwatch group to obtain their views. During and after the inspection we spoke with two health and social care professionals to gain their views about the service.

During our visit we spoke with fourteen people who used the service and observed their experiences. We also spoke to eight visitors, the registered manager, the deputy manager, a nurse, nine care staff, the activities co-ordinator, the cook and administration manager.

We looked at nine care records, seven medicines administration records, accident records and other records related to the management of the home.

Updated 14 April 2015

We carried out an unannounced visit on 15 December 2014 and a further announced visit was made on 13 January 2015.

Scarbrough Court is a purpose built home registered to provide accommodation for up to 55 adults who require nursing or personal care, some of whom are living with dementia. There were 49 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 registered provider had policies and procedures in place to help ensure people were safe and protected from harm. The system for dealing with medicines was appropriate and medicines were administered safely. Staff were aware of the need to protect people from abuse and had undertaken training. They were able to describe the different forms of abuse and the actions they would take if they had any concerns.

The registered provider monitored accidents and incidents so any concerns were highlighted and appropriate action taken. The premises were well maintained and regular checks were carried out on equipment in the home to protect people’s safety.

We looked at the staff recruitment records and they showed checks were carried out prior to staff being employed in the home to help ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. People and their relatives told us they were always sufficient staff on duty and the staff said they always had sufficient time to complete their daily duties.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS are part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). These safeguards aim to make sure that people are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom. The registered manager told us that she had submitted four applications to the Local Authority, where it was felt authorisations were required to restrict people’s liberty in their best interests and to safeguard them from harm.

We observed lunch being served at the home and staff met people’s needs sensitively and the meal was relaxed and unhurried. People told us the food was good and choices were always available. The records showed that staff had undergone appropriate training to meet people’s needs and staff confirmed this. They received regular supervision and were well supported by the management. Staff were able to describe people’s needs and they were cared for people in a considerate and dignified manner and that respected their privacy and dignity.

We saw information to show the home made prompt referrals to health care professionals if required and this was confirmed by the professionals we contacted. Two activities organisers were employed and a programme of activities and outings were provided which people could take part in.

People said they knew how to make a complaint and felt their complaint would be taken seriously by the registered manager. We looked at nine care records and found care plans reflected the assessed needs of people so staff were provided with information as to how they should be cared for.

The management team carried out audits and checks to help ensure standards were met and maintained. Annual surveys were sent to people and their relatives to seek their opinion of the service and we found the comments were positive. The results of the most recent survey were not yet analysed.