Archived: Belmont

Updated 21 March 2020

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. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

One inspector and an Expert by Experience carried out the inspection. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Belmont is a ‘care home’. 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 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 inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection, including information from the provider about important events that had taken place at the service, which they are required to send us. We sought feedback from the local authority. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with eight people who lived at the home and 10 relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the registered manager, deputy manager, care staff and kitchen staff. 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. We had a walk around the home to ensure the environment was a safe and homely place for people to live.

We reviewed a range of records. This included five people’s care records, multiple medication records, two staff recruitment records and we looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service. We sought advice from a pharmacy inspector regarding the use of specific medicines.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the registered manager to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records and read feedback from two health professionals.

Updated 21 March 2020

About the service

Belmont is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 49 people aged 65 and over. At the time of the inspection there were 39 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People did not always receive their medicines as prescribed and in line with best practice guidance to improve their conditions or symptoms. Not all staff had received training in the handling of medicines. People were protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm by staff who understood how to recognise, respond and report concerns. Allegations of abuse had been dealt with in a robust manner to assure people about their safety. People and their relatives told us they were safe. People and their relatives gave us mixed feedback regarding staffing levels at the home. The registered manager had robust and safe recruitment procedures and monitored the safety of the premises.

Staff supported people with meaningful day time activities inside the home and in the local community. People's individual communication needs had been assessed and staff had tools to assist their interactions with people. The registered manager dealt with people's concerns and complaints appropriately.

People told us their care and support had not always been planned in partnership with them and their relatives. Staff had received regular training. Improvements were required to ensure all staff were trained in the safe handling of medicines and received supervision in line with best practice guidance. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests.

People were positive about the service and said staff were kind and caring. People were treated with dignity and respect and their right to privacy was upheld. People were comfortable in the company of staff.

The governance and quality checks in the home did not consistently promote safe management of medicines. People, their relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered manager. The registered manager and the provider needed to improve the quality monitoring systems to ensure they were robust.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (16 August 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement:

We have identified breaches in relation to the management of medicines and lack of effective quality monitoring systems at this inspection. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.