Castle View Nursing Home

Castle View Nursing Home can accommodate up to 25 people. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a 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 provides accommodation over three floors which were accessed by a lift. There was an enclosed garden and a small parking area. The service had eight rooms that had been designated for ‘intermediate care’. People could access ‘intermediate care’ from hospital to receive rehabilitation for a short period of time. At the time of our inspection 17 people were living at the service and six people were temporarily staying on ‘intermediate care’.

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.

At this inspection we found the service remained good.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 continued to receive safe care. Risks had been identified, assessed and there were safety measures in place to keep people safe. There were systems in place to keep people safe from abuse or harm.

There were sufficient staff on duty to support people safely. The service had completed the necessary recruitment checks to make sure suitable staff were employed.

People continued to be effectively supported by a team of staff who were trained and well supported to meet their needs. Medicines were managed safely. Staff had been assessed as competent to administer medicines.

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.

Where needed and appropriate the service made referrals to external healthcare professionals in a timely way. People had individual care plans that had been personalised.

People had sufficient food and drink and could choose where to eat and what to eat and drink.

The service was clean with no unpleasant odours. The environment was well maintained and equipment was serviced regularly when appropriate. Staff used personal protective equipment when required.

Complaints were managed by the provider and lessons were learned.

Staff were able to attend team meetings and told us the organisation were supportive and provided opportunities for development.

People and their relatives were encouraged to give feedback formally and informally.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This inspection took place on 19 February 2016 and was unannounced. We returned on 24 February 2016 to complete the inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People who use the service and their relatives were positive about the care they received and praised the quality of the staff and management. Comments from people included, “The staff are very kind and they know what they’re doing”, “The staff are lovely. We have our ups and downs, but generally things work out very well. They’re like family to me” and “They look after me very well”.

People told us they felt safe when receiving care and were involved in developing and reviewing their care plans. Systems were in place to protect people from abuse and harm and staff knew how to use them. Comments from people included, “Yes, I feel safe here. That’s really important to me to feel comfortable” and “I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else, I feel safe here”.

Staff understood the needs of the people they were providing care for. People’s needs were set out in care plans they had been involved in developing. Staff followed these plans, which helped to ensure people received care in the way they preferred.

Staff were appropriately trained and had the right skills to provide the care people needed. They received a thorough induction when they started working for the home and demonstrated a good understanding of their role and responsibilities. Staff had completed training to ensure the care and support provided to people was safe and effective to meet their needs.

The service was responsive to people’s needs and wishes. People had regular group and individual meetings to provide feedback about their care and there was an effective complaints procedure. One person told us, “I have no concerns, but I would speak to the manager or deputy if I did. They would sort it out”

The provider regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care provided at Castle View. Feedback from people and their relatives was encouraged and was used to make improvements to the service.

We looked at four care records which confirmed people's mental capacity status had been assessed by the registered manager prior to the person receiving care. There was signed consent for information about the person's health to be shared with third parties, for example, their GP or other healthcare professionals in an emergency.

Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work and these were undertaken by the providers qualified human resource officer.

The senior managers of all the providers homes had a monthly meeting where various aspects of service provision were discussed and audit outcomes were presented. An example we were given was where a new on line training package for staff was evaluated for its effectiveness.

Relatives we spoke with confirmed they were aware of the complaints process and knew what they would do if they were unhappy with the service.