Clifford House Residential Care Home

Updated 12 February 2021

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.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 26 January 2021 and was announced.

Updated 12 February 2021

About the service: Clifford House is a care home. It does not provide nursing care. It can accommodate up to 21 people. At the time of the inspection there were 19 people using the service.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection in April 2018, we rated the service as ‘Requires improvement’. That inspection identified two breaches of the Regulations. There had been a failure to ensure controlled drugs were managed in line with legal requirements and the governance systems had not been fully effective at assessing the safety and quality of the service.

People’s experience of using this service: Some of the risks associated with people’s care had not been consistently assessed and planned for. Some care plans still contained omissions or would benefit from being more detailed.

Improvements were needed to ensure that all of the required pre-employment checks took place.

Opportunities for organisation learning were not being maximised. The system for documenting and investigating incidents and other safety events needed to be more effective.

Improvements had been made to ensure that controlled drugs were managed in line with legal requirements.

There was a more comprehensive range of audits being undertaken and it was evident that these were beginning to drive improvements.

Systems and processes were in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse.

The home was visibly clean, and staff followed appropriate infection control measures.

There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff received an induction and regular training opportunities to keep their knowledge up to date. There was an effective supervision programme in place.

People were offered choice and control over the care they received. Where there was doubt about people’s ability to make significant decisions about their care, mental capacity assessments had been completed to check whether people could consent to the care and support being provided.

Staff were using evidence-based practice and guidance to enhance the care provided.

People were supported to eat and drink and to maintain a balanced healthy diet.

A range of improvements had been made to the internal décor and to ensure that people had access to a pleasant, well maintained, albeit small, outdoor space.

Where necessary a range of healthcare professionals had been involved in supporting people to maintain good health.

People continued to be treated with kindness, respect and dignity. Staff understood the importance of supporting people to maintain their independence.

People and their relatives told us that a strength of the service was its friendliness, the relaxed and homely environment and the person-centred care provided.

A programme of activities was provided with people told us they enjoyed.

Information about how to complain was readily available within the service and people were confident they could raise concerns and that these would be listened to.

People were supported to live well until their death and to remain at Clifford House if this was their wish.

There was a clear leadership and management structure in place which helped to ensure that that staff at all levels were clear about their role and responsibilities.

People and their relatives had been asked to share their views about the quality of care they received, and we saw that people had opportunities to get involved in influencing their care and environment.

The registered manager had developed links with the local community and key organisations to benefit people living in the home and to help with the development of the service.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection in April 2018.

Follow up: Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our re-inspection schedule for those services rated Good.

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