Archived: St Mary's Haven Respite

Updated 30 July 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.

The inspection took place on 28 April 2015. The inspection was unannounced and was undertaken by one inspector.

We did not request a Provider Information Return (PIR) from the provider prior to the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make. Before the inspection we reviewed information held about the service and notifications of incidents we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We looked around the premises and observed care practices. We spoke with six people who lived at the service, one member of care staff, the registered manager and the service’s administrator We looked at three records relating to the care of individuals, three staff recruitment files, staff duty rosters, staff training records and records relating to the running of the home.

Following the inspection we also spoke with three external professionals who were familiar with the service.

Updated 30 July 2015

This was an unannounced inspection, carried out on 28 April 2015. There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

St. Mary’s Haven Respite provides accommodation for up to nine people who need support with their personal care. The service mainly provides support for older people, the majority of whom live at the service on a long-term basis. The service uses a detached house arranged over two floors and has nine single occupancy rooms. There were eight people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

People told us they felt safe. Comments included; “I am very happy here. I feel safe and well looked after. No issues at all.” We walked around the home and saw it was comfortable and personalised to reflect people’s individual tastes.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect. The staff in the home took time to speak with the people they were supporting. We saw many positive interactions and people enjoyed talking with the staff in the home. Comments included; “The staff are lovely, very caring”. Another person said, “They are a friendly bunch. There is always someone to talk to if I want it”. Staff were trained and competent to provide the support people needed.

Where people did not have the capacity to make certain decisions the home acted in accordance with legal requirements under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People had a choice of meals, snacks and drinks, which they told us they enjoyed. People had been included in planning menus and their feedback about the meals in the home had been listened to and acted on. We saw people chose to sit together at lunch. Other people chose to eat in their rooms and told us they were happy with this choice. Comments included; “I like the food, it is very good” and, “The food is very good; freshly prepared and lots of variety. Like today there is a good choice and I am having fresh fruit salad and cream for my pudding”. People were given a choice of hot and cold meals. Each day they were shown the choices available to enable them to choose what they wanted.

Visitors were always made welcome and were able to visit at any time. People were able to see their visitors in lounge areas or in private. People knew how to complain and would be happy to speak with the registered manager if they had any concerns.

People told us their families had been included in planning and agreeing to the care provided at the home. We saw that people had an individual plan, detailing the support they needed and how they wanted this to be provided. A person told us, “I am as involved in planning my care as I choose to be. I am kept fully aware and involved in everything to do with my care here and I have every confidence in the staff”.

Staff knew the people they were supporting and the choices they had made about their care and their lives. People were supported to maintain their independence and control over their lives.