Dearnevale

Updated 10 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

The inspection was carried out by an inspector and a specialist advisor who was a nurse.

Service and service type

Dearnevale 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

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.

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with five people who used the service and four relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with the regional director of operations, the registered manager and six members of care staff. We also spoke with a visiting professional. 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 reviewed a range of records. This included five people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with two more professionals who regularly visit the service.

Updated 10 March 2020

About the service

Dearnevale is a care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 44 people, some of whom have a range of complex needs. The service specialises in care for people with neurological disabilities, brain injury, stroke and enduring mental ill health. The home provides care over four units and in one adjacent 'one-care' service. One-care offers extended pathways of care, providing a more independent home for people who have met rehabilitation goals and enabling them to return gradually to life in the community, or those who can live independently with support nearby, or for people who require an individual care environment. There were 42 people living at Dearnevale at the time of the inspection.

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

People were treated with the utmost kindness and compassion. Without exception staff were highly motivated and used positive, encouraging language, eye contact and tactile communication where needed with all the people they cared for. People’s diversity was respected and there was no evidence of any discriminatory practice at the home. Service user led meetings resulted in extremely positive impacts on people. People at the home, their family and friends, where appropriate, were involved in all discussions and reviews of care. People said their dignity was unfailingly respected and observations supported this. A relative commented, “[Relative] is looked after with the utmost dignity.” People’s independence was positively promoted at all times.

Staff demonstrated a high level of knowledge of each person who lived at the home. Extra training had been provided for staff around specific diseases, to ensure they had the correct, high level of skills and knowledge to meet the needs of each individual. Assistive technology was widely used to aid communication and ensure maximum involvement in all aspects of daily living.

Visitors were warmly welcomed at the home. People were fully supported to maintain relationships and to follow their interests and hobbies. Staff supported people to achieve their full potential and fulfil their own goals and objectives in very creative ways. Concerns or complaints were dealt with efficiently and honestly. People’s wishes for the end of their lives were respected.

There was a very clear culture of absolute respect and kindness within the home, emanating from every member of staff and led by a visible and supportive management team. Staff demonstrated a high level of pride in the service and their roles within it and spoke with enthusiasm and passion about their work.

The service actively and positively participated within the local community. For example, the home had run an after school club one day per week last year. This had been a tremendous success and the service was intending to repeat the experience in the near future.

People felt safe at the service and systems were in place to help ensure their safety. Appropriate risk assessments were kept in people’s care files. Staff were recruited safely and there was a consistent staff team who had worked at the home for long periods of time. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet the needs of the people living at the home. There were safe systems in place for managing medicines and staff completed regular medicines training.

Thorough pre-admission assessments were completed and care plans included a range of health and personal information. Staff were supported with a thorough induction and a comprehensive on-going training programme. 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; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

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 inspection was in April 2015 (published 7 July 2015) and we rated the service as good. There was an inspection in November 2017 however, the report following that inspection was withdrawn as there was an issue with some of the information that we gathered.

Why we inspected

This is a planned re-inspection because of the issue highlighted above.

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.