The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Aughton Grange Care Home

26 Granville Park, Aughton, Ormskirk, Lancashire, L39 5DU (01695) 423564

Provided and run by:
Argyle Care Group Limited

All Inspections

18 December 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out this inspection to check what improvements had been made since we last inspected the service in October 2014, at which time we served Warning Notices against the Provider for breaches of five Regulations.

The inspection was carried out over one day, by an Adult Social Care Inspection manager and an Inspector. During this inspection we inspected the premises, spoke with staff and the manager and looked at records which we asked the manager to provide.

We found improvements had been made with regard to involving people and their relatives, the general environment, cleanliness and monitoring the performance of the service. However, there were still improvements that were required in order for the service to be fully compliant with the regulations we inspected against.

26 September and 1 October 2014

During an inspection in response to concerns

We undertook this inspection in response to information of concern that we received from the local authority safeguarding team.

The inspection team consisted of, on day one, two Adult Social Care Inspectors and an Inspection Manager; and on day two, two Adult social Care Inspectors.

We found the service did not routinely involve people in decisions relating to their care and treatment. Staff used inappropriate language to describe people and did not treat people with the consideration and respect they deserved. Living conditions at the home were poor and did not uphold the dignity of people who used the service.

People did not receive personalised care and treatment in line with their individual needs. We found evidence of institutional practices at the home. The provider did not have appropriate plans in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

The state of cleanliness in all areas of the home was unacceptable. People were not protected against the risks of health care associated infections.

The home was inadequately maintained. Areas of the home required immediate attention to make them safe for people who used the service.

The provider was not operating effective systems to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided to people. People, others acting on their behalf and staff were not routinely asked for their views about the performance of the service.

30 October 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

We reviewed outcome 12 relating to recruitment of staff as we had received some concerning information at the Commission that the provider (Argyle Care Ltd) had unsafe recruitment practices within the company.

This was a follow up visit from the review we carried out on the 8 August 2013. At that time we had found they were fully compliant with recruitment practices.

We looked at all the staff files that included staff who had been employed at the service for a long time. We had no concerns in how recruitment was managed. We found that good recruitment practices were followed and staffs' suitability and fitness to practice had continued to be monitored. People were cared for staff who were physically and mentally fit to do their job.

8 August 2013

During a routine inspection

People using the service had limited communication ability which meant they were not necessarily able to tell us their experiences. We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people living at Aughton Grange.

We looked at records and found care and support was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare.

Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and diversity. They were sufficiently detailed to make sure peoples' care and support would be provided according to their needs and safety. Lifestyle profile provided staff with insight into peoples' life experiences and values.

People's care and support was planned and delivered in a way that protected them from unlawful discrimination. People were involved in the local community and activities were very well organised both inside and outside the home. Attention was paid to individual likes/dislikes such as going to a local pub/visit to Aintree.

Staff had written guidance how to support and protect people in difficult situations. We observed people were comfortable around staff and showed no sign of fearful or concerning behaviour around them.

There was enough staff who were trained to support people as and when they required it.

Standards of quality and safety were being monitored and there was a continuing improvement plan being followed.

A family member said he was 'Very happy' with the provision for his uncle.

9 October 2012

During a routine inspection

People had their needs assessed. Where people lacked capacity following an assessment to make the best choices, their interests was protected. Procedures were followed to get valid consent were followed in practice and monitored. Relatives told us, 'They will always discuss her care with me. They are very good that way. I'm kept up to date with what is happening'. 'I visit regularly, they tell me how she is and if she needs anything. They always ask me what I think regarding her care'. Staff spoke to people respectfully, communicated well and appropriately. People were included in all activities. Relatives told us staff were very understanding and kept up to date with events. They said, 'I've a lot of respect for them'. Records showed staff followed care plans and responded to people's needs as required. Staff treated people with respect and maintained their dignity when providing support. Relatives told us staff were very patient with people. People were supported to live as valued citizens within the home and the wider community. Recruitment processes were good in making sure people were kept safe by employing only people with a proven record of good character. Staffing levels were very good. Staff were mindful of difficulties people may have in expressing concerns. They said they were trained to ensure high quality in care and would act on behalf of people they supported in raising issues for improvement.

25 May 2011

During a routine inspection

Outcome 1

During the course of the visit we spoke with the registered manager, a recently recruited qualified member of staff, the activity coordinator and four relatives of people living at the home. We also spent a period of time observing staff and residents in a communal area of the home and talking with a small number of people living at the home. However the conversation with residents was somewhat limited because of mental incapacity.

Without exception, people spoke very positively about Aughton Grange and the care and support provided. One relative told us, 'The atmosphere feels like a friendly home not an institution. The staff care for them so well. The staff are very approachable, understanding; discrete and caring, staff always come and talk with me. ****** has thrown a lot at them and they have managed things very well. Everything is excellent'

OUTCOME 2 Consent to care and treatment:

We received no comments about this outcome area from people who use the service however relatives spoken with confirmed that they were fully informed about the individual personal plans which were regularly viewed and discussed. One relative told us, 'I am involved in the care plan which I often see and reviews of the care plan. The staff keep me fully involved.'

Outcome 4

We also spoke with a small number of people living in the home in a lounge area; however discussion with these people was limited because of mental impairment. Relatives spoken with all spoke very highly of the care and support provided at Aughton Grange and the qualities of the staff team.

OUTCOME 5: Meeting Nutritional Needs

What people who use the service experienced and told us:

Although discussion was limited, one person spoken with told us that he liked the meals served. A relative explained that she had worked with the home following her father's weight loss, to devise a menu that was acceptable and enjoyable for the individual and also acceptable to his relatives. This same person said, 'We are very satisfied with the level of personalised care provided here'.

Outcome 7: Safeguarding people who use services from abuse.

What people who use the service experienced and told us.

We received no comments from people who use the service about this outcome. However a relative told us, 'We sleep at night, they look after her superbly, we walk in and mum's body language tells us she is happy'.

OUTCOME 8: Cleanliness and infection control.

What people who use the service experienced and told us:

We received no comments from people living at the home about this outcome area. A relative spoken with said that the home was always kept clean and tidy and that her father's bedroom was comfortable.

OUTCOME 12 REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO WORKERS

What people who use the service experienced and told us.

Two recently appointed members of staff confirmed that a thorough recruitment process had taken place prior to them being offered employment at the home. Relatives spoken with all spoke very highly of the staff team with one person saying, 'I honestly think that they deserve footballer's wages, I have a lot of respect for them'. Another person told us, 'They have a long standing staff group that have empathy with residents'. A third person said, 'Every single member of staff is superb, they treat people with dignity and respect, it's like coming into her home'. (Mother).

OUTCOME 13: Staffing

What people who use the service experienced and told us:

We received no comments from people who use the service about this outcome. A member of staff spoken with individually stated that sufficient staffing levels were always maintained during the 24 hour period to address the assessed needs of the people living at Aughton Grange.

OUTCOME 14: Supporting workers.

What people who use the service experienced and told us.

We received no comments from people who use the service about this outcome area. However staff spoke positively about the training provided.

OUTCOME 16: Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision.

What people who use the service experienced and told us.

We received no comments from people who use the service about this outcome area. Relatives spoken with confirmed that they were encouraged to voice their opinions and suggestions for improvement.

OUTCOME 17: Complaints.

What people who use the service experienced and told us:

We received no comments from people who use the service about this outcome area. The relatives spoken with stated that there was good communication with the staff team and that any concern was immediately addressed.