Archived: Skellow Hall

Updated 17 May 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 11 April 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by and adult social care 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 care service. At the time of our inspection there were 21 people using the service.

Before our inspection, we reviewed all the information we held about the home. We spoke with the local authority to gain further information about the service.

We spoke with 10 people who used the service, and 3 relatives. We also 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 spoke with two care workers, a senior care worker, the activity co-ordinator and the deputy manager. The registered manager was unavailable on the day of our inspection due to other work commitments. We spoke with the registered manager the day after our inspection. We looked at documentation relating to people who used the service, staff and the management of the service. We looked at three people’s care and support records, including the plans of their care. We saw the systems used to manage people’s medication, including the storage and records kept. We also looked at the quality assurance systems to check if they were robust and identified areas for improvement.

Updated 17 May 2017

The inspection took place on 11 April 2017 and was unannounced. This provider registered with the Care Quality Commission in November 2015. This was the first inspection of the service under the new registration.

Skellow Hall is situated in the village of Skellow near Doncaster. The service provides personal care and accommodation for up to 29 people. The service has two floors with two lifts and stairs to access the upper level. Bedrooms are for single occupancy. Some bedrooms have en-suite showers and others have en-suite toilets and wash hand basins.

At the time of our inspection the service had a registered manager. 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.

At the time of our inspection the registered manager was unavailable due to other work commitments. Therefore we liaised with the deputy manager, who is referred to throughout this report.

We looked at care records and found that risks associated with people’s care had been identified. However, instructions on how to minimise risks occurring were not always included in care records.

The provider had a safe and effective system in place for employing new staff. New employees had to complete satisfactory pre-employment checks prior to them commencing their job at the home.

We looked at the systems in place to manage people’s medicines and found this was done in a safe way. We looked at storage and records of medicine and found these were accurate.

We observed staff interacting with people and we found that people’s needs were met in a timely manner. However, some people who used the service and their relatives told us that there were not always enough staff around to meet people’s needs.

The service had a policy in place to safeguard people from abuse. Staff knew how to recognise, record and report abuse.

Training was provided to staff to ensure they were kept up to date with their knowledge. Staff we spoke with felt supported by their managers and felt they were approachable.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People received a nutritious and balanced diet which met their needs and maintained their preferences.

People had access to healthcare professionals when required.

Throughout our inspection we observed staff interacting with people who used the service. We found staff were kind, caring and considerate. They worked hard to ensure people’s likes and dislikes were respected.

People did not always receive person-centred care which was appropriate and met their needs. Care plans we looked at did not reflect people’s current needs or indicate how to support people.

The service had an activity co-ordinator who organised and provided social activities for people. We spoke with the activity co-ordinator and found that they planned activities for each month and advertised them in the newsletter.

The service had a complaints procedure and we found that concerns raised had been managed appropriately.

The provider had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. We found that the management team conducted several audits each month. However, these were not always effective.