Stone House

Updated 5 July 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) 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 Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

This inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Service and service type:

Stone House 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 service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This was an unannounced inspection.

What we did:

The provider submitted a provider information return (PIR) prior to this inspection. 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. We also reviewed information we held about the service such as previous inspection reports and statutory notifications. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law.

We asked the local authority, commissioners and Healthwatch for any information they had which would aid our inspection. We used this information as part of our planning. Local authorities together with other agencies may have responsibility for funding people who used the service and monitoring its quality. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion, which promotes the views and experiences of people who use health and social care services. No concerns were raised by the professionals we contacted.

During the inspection we spoke with 11 people who lived at the home and three relatives. 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. The registered manager was available throughout our inspection. We also spoke with five members of staff and met with a member of the provider’s senior management team. We looked at three people’s care plans, medication records, staff training records and records relating to health and safety and the management of the home.

Updated 5 July 2019

About the service: Stone House is a residential care home which provides support with personal care needs for up to 40 people, some of who may be living with dementia. At the time of this inspection 33 were living at the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

People and their relatives told us they were supported by an exceptionally caring and considerate staff team who knew them well, treated them as individuals and with the upmost respect. A person who lived at the home said, “I can’t speak highly enough about the staff. They really are amazing, and they put themselves out for me.” A relative told us, “They [staff] should have a gold standard award. They are all so kind and caring and will do anything for [relative]. I wouldn’t want my [relative to be anywhere else. You couldn’t get better than this.” Staff went out of their way to respect people as individuals and provided exceptionally compassionate care to all. Staff had developed meaningful caring relationships with people and were committed to ensuring people lived fulfilling lives and were protected from social isolation.

People felt safe and could raise concerns. The staff team knew the action to take to safeguard people from the risk of harm and abuse. They supported people to take managed risks and enabled them to live the lifestyle of their choosing. Staff were recruited safely and deployed in sufficient numbers to meet people's needs. People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who were trained and competent to carry out the task.

People's health and nutritional needs were monitored and met. People saw health care professionals when required. People were provided with a nutritious and healthy diet, whilst still ensuring there were treats and snacks in-between meals.

Staff understood the importance of ensuring people’s rights were understood and protected. 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 service supported this practice.

The registered manager led by example. People, staff and relatives felt their views were important and that their opinions were listened to. Staff were valued by the provider and registered manager. Staff morale was good, and staff were encouraged to share ideas and suggestions for improvements. There was an emphasis of continuous learning and there were effective procedures in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

Rating at last inspection: At our last inspection in September 2016 (report published 11 November 2016) the service was rated good.

Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to

visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk