Archived: Meteor Rest Home

Updated 19 March 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.

This inspection took place on 15 February 2016 and 16 February 2016 and was unannounced and carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection the registered manager had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the registered manager to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed other information that we hold about the service such as notifications, these are the events happening in the service that the registered manager is required to tell us about. We used this information to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection.

As part of the inspection we spoke with five people who used the service, two relatives and two members of care and support staff, deputy manager and the registered manager who was also the joint owner of the service.

Some people were unable to communicate with us verbally to tell us about the quality of the service provided and how they were cared for by staff. We therefore used observations, speaking with staff, and relatives, reviewing care records and other information to help us assess how people’s care needs were being met.

We spent time observing care in the communal areas and 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.

As part of this inspection we reviewed three people’s care records. We looked at the recruitment and support records for three members of staff. We reviewed other records such as medicines management, complaints and compliments information, quality monitoring and audit information and maintenance records.

Updated 19 March 2016

The unannounced inspection took place on the 15 February 2016 and 16 February 2016.

Meteor Rest home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to a maximum of 15 people, some of whom may be diagnosed with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were fifteen people living in the service.

The service is required to and did have a registered manager. 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.

Staff delivered support effectively and care was provided in a way that intended to promote people’s independence and wellbeing, whilst people’s safety was ensured. Staff were recruited and employed upon completion of appropriate checks as part of a robust recruitment process. Sufficient numbers of staff enabled people’s individual needs to be met adequately. Qualified staff dispensed medications and monitored people’s health satisfactorily.

Staff understood their responsibilities and how to keep people safe. People’s rights were also protected because management and staff understood the legal framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The registered manager and staff ensured access to healthcare services were readily available to people and worked with a range of healthcare professionals, such as social workers, community mental health nurses and GPs to implement care and support plans.

Staff were respectful and compassionate towards people ensuring privacy and dignity was valued. People were supported in a person centred way by staff who understood their roles in relation to encouraging independence whilst mitigating potential risks. People were supported to identify their own interests and pursue them with the assistance of staff. Person centred social activities took place within the service as well as in the community.

Systems were in place to make sure that people’s views were gathered. These included regular meetings, direct interactions with people and questionnaires being distributed to people, relatives and healthcare professionals. The service was assisted to run effectively by the use of quality monitoring audits the registered manager carried out, which identified any improvements needed. A complaints procedure was in place and had been implemented appropriately by the management team.