Background to this inspection
Updated
21 November 2019
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 one inspector, a specialist nurse advisor and an Expert by Experience. 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
Bloomfield Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as 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 in post who had applied to become registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that once registered, 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. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. However, we did receive a completed return the day after the 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.
During the inspection
We spoke with four people who used the service and eight relatives about their experience of the care provided. We also spoke with a visiting healthcare professional, eight members of care staff, the manager and the director for care.
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 six people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including minutes of meetings, quality assurance audits, complaints management and policies and procedures were reviewed.
Updated
21 November 2019
About the service
Bloomfield Court is a care home and provides care and accommodation for up to 47 people. At the time of our inspection visit, 28 people lived at the home, some of who were living with dementia. Bloomfield Court is adapted to meet people’s needs and has three floors within the building.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People felt safe and were supported by a group of staff who knew them well. Staff were aware of the types of abuse people were at risk of and their responsibilities to report and act on any concerns. Staff were aware of the potential risks of harm and injury to people on a daily basis and took actions to minimise those risks. People’s care plans were updated to reflect changes in their needs.
People were supported by a group of safely recruited staff. Staffing levels had been assessed in line with people’s dependency needs and people were responded to in a timely manner. People were supported to receive their medicines as prescribed. Accidents and incidents were reported and acted on appropriately and analysed for any lessons to be learnt, so future risks were minimised.
Staff were complimentary of the service and the manager and felt supported and well trained. New staff were provided with an induction that prepared them for their role. New staff felt supported and welcomed by both their colleagues and the manager.
People were supported to access healthcare services. Healthcare agencies visited the home and worked alongside staff to help maintain people’s good health and prevent, where possible, admission to hospital. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and had access to drinks and snacks throughout the day.
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.
Staff were seen as kind, caring and compassionate. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported. Families felt welcomed and listened to and spoke positively about the care their loved ones received. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who knew them well.
People and families were involved in the planning, development and review of their care. People’s opinions of the service were sought on a regular basis, through conversations, surveys and meetings. People had no complaints but were confident that if they did raise an issue it would be dealt with appropriately.
People were encouraged to take part in a variety of activities that were of interest to them. All care staff were involved in ensuring group and individual activities took place throughout the day.
Staff, people and visitors were all highly complimentary of the manager and the changes she had bought to the service. Staff felt supported and listened to and were actively engaged in developing and improving the service.
The manager had a vision for the service which was shared with staff. There were a variety of audits in place to help drive improvement and the manager had introduced a number of systems and processes to provide her with complete oversight of the service.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (report published 31 October 2018).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.