11 April 2017
During a routine inspection
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.