Cromarty House

Updated 22 February 2023

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 Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team The inspection was completed by one inspector.

Service and service type

Cromarty House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. Cromarty House is a care home without nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post. The registered manager was also the provider.

Notice of inspection We gave a short period notice of the inspection because it was carried out at the weekend. We needed to be sure a manager would be available to support the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

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 the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

Most people living at the service were not able to share their views verbally, so we observed how they spent their time and how they interacted with staff. We spoke with 3 people and 5 staff members including the manager. We reviewed 2 people’s care records, everyone’s medicines records and a range of records relating to the management of the service, such as meeting minutes, feedback surveys and audits. We spoke with 4 relatives by phone and received written feedback from 3 professionals.

Updated 22 February 2023

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

About the service

Cromarty House is a residential care home providing personal care to 8 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 8 people.

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

Right Support:

The care model focused on people’s strengths and promoted what they could do. People made choices and took part in meaningful activities which were part of their planned care and support. Staff supported them to achieve their aspirations and goals.

People had proactive plans in place in case they experienced periods of distress. This helped ensure staff kept them safe and supported them in a person-centred way at these times.

People’s care and support was provided in a safe, clean, well equipped, well-furnished and well-maintained environment which met their sensory and physical needs.

Reasonable adjustments were made for people so they could participate fully in discussions about the service.

The registered manger and staff worked well with other organisations, so people had good access to specialist health and social care support in the community.

People were supported to make decisions by staff who used best practice in decision-making and communicated with people in ways that met their needs.

Staff supported people with their medicines in a way that promoted their independence and achieved the best possible health outcome

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. We made a recommendation about recording assessments of people’s capacity.

Right Care:

Staff actively promoted equality and diversity in their support to people. Care plans detailed people’s needs and preferences related to any protected characteristics.

Staff protected people from abuse and poor care. The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet their needs and keep them safe.

People’s care, treatment and support plans reflected their range of needs and this promoted their wellbeing and helped them achieve good outcomes

Staff ensured individualised risk assessments were undertaken and that people were involved in these where possible. Where appropriate positive risk taking was encouraged and enabled. Staff supported changes that individuals might want to make and assessed risks continuously

Right Culture:

People lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff. The registered manager modelled good practice and led by example

Staff placed people’s wishes, needs and rights at the heart of everything they did. Staff knew and understood people well and were responsive, supporting their aspirations to live a quality life of their choosing.

Staff turnover was very low, which supported people to receive consistent care from staff who knew them well.

People and those important to them, were actively involved in planning their care.

People’s quality of life was enhanced by the culture of improvement and inclusivity within the service.

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 (published 30 December 2017).

Why we inspected This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. We undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has remained good based on the findings of this inspection.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.