Archived: Grange Lea Rest Home

Updated 18 October 2016

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 was carried out on 31 August and 02 September 2016 and was unannounced. It was carried out by one inspector and a specialist advisor. A specialist advisor is a person employed by the Care Quality Commission to support inspectors during an inspection and have specialist knowledge in a certain area. The specialist advisor on this team had a background of working with older people with mental health related conditions and was a qualified nurse.

Prior to the inspection we consulted the Northumberland local authority safeguarding team and contract monitoring department and we used the information they provided when planning our inspection. We also reviewed information we held about the service including any statutory notifications that the provider had sent us. Notifications are made to us by providers in line with their obligations under the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. These are records of incidents that have occurred within the service or other matters that the provider is legally obliged to inform us of.

As part of the inspection we spoke with eight people who used the service, seven relatives, a GP, a nurse, a volunteer and a community care worker who visited the service on a regular basis.

On this occasion, we asked for a Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. All of this information informed our planning of the inspection.

Updated 18 October 2016

The inspection took place on 31 August 2016 and 02 September 2016 and was unannounced. The service was last inspected on 29 December 2014 and no breaches in regulations were found.

Grange Lea Rest Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 20 older people. Refurbishment of the premises resulting in larger rooms means that the service can now accommodate up to 19 people. There were 17 people using the service during our inspection.

The provider is a husband and wife partnership with one of them registered as the manager of the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People and their relatives told us the service was safe. There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place, and staff were aware of the action to take if abuse or neglect were suspected. Refresher training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults was being arranged. Risk assessments and regular checks on the safety of the building, premises and equipment were carried out. Individual risks to people were assessed, and measures put in place to mitigate these risks. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored by the provider to identify patterns or trends.

Suitable numbers of staff were deployed during our inspection and recruitment procedures ensured that the suitability of staff to work with vulnerable people was checked prior to appointment. Safe procedures were in place for the ordering, receipt, administration storage and disposal of medicines.

People were supported with eating and drinking. The nutritional needs of people were assessed and action was taken in the event of concerns related to dietary intake. People were offered a choice of meals and alternatives were readily available. Likes, dislikes and special diets were accommodated.

Staff received regular training, supervision and appraisals. Where there were gaps in refresher training, this had been identified and planned. People told us staff were knowledgeable and ensured their physical health and wellbeing needs were met. Staff had received training related to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and the Mental Capacity Act, and refresher training was planned. Capacity assessments had been carried out and people had signed consent forms to agree to care and treatment plans in place, and to reside in the home. Where people lacked capacity, applications had been made to the local authority to deprive people of their liberty in line with legal requirements.

All interactions we observed between staff and people were caring and respectful. The privacy and dignity of people was respected, and we received positive feedback about the care provided from people, relatives and visiting professionals. A number of relatives commented positively about the end of life care their family members received and praised the staff and provider highly for the quality of care provided.

Person centred care plans were in place;, these were up to date and reviewed on a regular basis. Some care plans in place to meet the psychological needs of people required more details, and this had been added by the second day of the inspection. A range of activities were available and a volunteer visited the service during our inspection to spend time with people which they told us they enjoyed. A complaints procedure was in place but no formal complaints had been received in the last 12 months. People and relatives told us they had not needed to complain and that any minor concerns were dealt with swiftly and proactively by the registered manager.

People relatives and visiting professionals spoke highly of the provider and registered manager who they found helpful, caring and professional. Regular audits on the safety of the service, care delivered, and records were carried out. Feedback was sought from people, relatives and staff via an annual survey. Staff said they felt well supported but they would like more regular staff meetings. We spoke to the provider about this. The culture of the service was homely and inviting and several people and relatives told us that the home enjoyed an excellent reputation locally which is why they had chosen the service. There were strong links with the community including the local church.