Starr Hills

We found the following examples of good practice.

The provider had dedicated staff to ensure people were admitted safely and continued to be supported in the service in accordance with national guidance. Infection prevention and control (IPC) policies and procedures were kept under review. We found safe processes were in place and appropriate action had been taken. The local commissioner’s IPC team was providing advice and support when required.

Social media systems such as mobile phones and computer systems were used to facilitate contact between people and their relatives. One relative said, “We are blessed with this place my [relative] has been so well looked after and kept him in good spirits with helping me visit him.”

During our visit we observed the staff using Personal Protective Equipment, (PPE) safely. The registered manager told us sufficient stocks of PPE were available and we confirmed this on the visit.

People living at Starr Hills and staff were tested regularly for COVID-19. There were no staff employed who had not been vaccinated as now required.

The home was clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place and PPE stations placed around the home. There were designated domestic staff and cleaning schedules were followed. The registered manager carried out regular checks of the environment and cleanliness and any issues were being acted on. Comments about the cleanliness of the building were positive and they included from people, “They really concentrate to keep the place clean.” Also, “Very good cleaning staff as you can see.”

Starr Hills is owned by Methodist Homes and offers personal care to older people. Set on two floors all bedrooms are single with en suite facilities. A passenger lift is in place and ramps are situated at exit and entry points. An enclosed garden area is at the front of the home. Registered for 36 People. There were 36 people living at Starr Hills at the time of the inspection visit.

People’s experience of using this service:

The culture of the Starr Hills continued to be extremely caring, compassionate, respectful and empowering which reflected the values of the service. There was a strong recognition that people were treated as individuals. All people who lived at the home and relatives spoke highly of the caring attitude of staff. One person who lived at the home said, “Fantastic place, fantastic caring staff and fantastic manager. What else can I say.”

We observed and found many examples how Starr Hills continued to excel at their responsiveness to people’s needs, choices and wishes. One person who lived at the home said, “It was so refreshing that they let me make my own decisions and went through things together, an excellent home.” Records were extremely personalised with agreed goals to help each person maximise their independence and life-skills. People were assisted to retain their vital family relationships.

It was clear staff morale was excellent and everyone was committed to ensuring people received care and support based on their preferences and life choices.

The staff and management team continued to present as outstanding in the way they worked with each individual to establish their strengths. They empowered people to make their own choices and decisions. This was confirmed by people who lived at the home and relatives we spoke with.

Starr Hills continued to have exceptionally high levels of staffing and skill mixes, which were deployed in innovative ways so they could respond to people’s needs and choices. One person who lived at the home said, “They have a lot of staff around which means when I want to go out or spend time to do things there is always someone available.”

The aim at Starr Hills centred on promoting people’s individual and cultural needs. This included outstanding training to support staff in person-centred care and diversity and understanding so staff were aware of what high standards looked like.

People who lived at Starr Hills and relatives we spoke with felt extremely confident in the management team and how the service operated. They told us excellent staffing levels afforded people responsive and dignified support.

Staff at Starr Hills were highly committed to ensuring people experienced fulfilling lives and were protected from social isolation. The whole ethos of people's care was individualised and focused on promoting people's independence as well as their physical and mental well-being. People were empowered to make their own choices and staff were highly motivated. This meant they were able to achieve very positive outcomes for people.

People who lived at the home told us the quality and choices of food provided was very good. Healthy eating was promoted. Meal times were relaxed and organised around people’s individual daily routines.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We found staff worked within the same Mental Capacity Act framework they had at the last inspection by CQC.

People’s care and support had been planned proactively and in partnership with them. They felt consulted and listened to about how their care would be delivered.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. People received their medicines as prescribed and when needed and appropriate records had been completed.

They service continued to have good oversight of relevant procedures through monitoring and auditing to ensure people who lived at the home received medication safely.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included satisfaction surveys to seek their views about the service provided. Recent surveys only produced positive comments about the home.

More information is in Detailed Findings below.

Rating at last inspection: Outstanding (31 January 2017)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated outstanding overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme or if any issues or concerns are identified.

Starr Hills is owned by Methodist Homes and offers personal care to older people. Set on two floors all bedrooms are single with en suite facilities. A passenger lift is in place and ramps are situated at exit and entry points. An enclosed garden area is at the front of the home. Registered for 36 People. There were 36 people living at Starr Hills at the time of the inspection visit.

A registered manager was in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are The inspection visit took place on 02 November 2016 and was unannounced.

Starr Hills is owned by Methodist Homes and offers personal care to older people. Set on two floors all bedrooms are single with en suite facilities. A passenger lift is in place and ramps are situated at exit and entry points. An enclosed garden area is at the front of the home. Registered for 36 People. There were 36 people living at Starr Hills at the time of the inspection visit.

A registered manager was in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

At the last inspection on 18 September 2014 we found the provider was meeting the requirements of the regulations inspected.

We found many examples of how activities and ratios of staff allowed one to one support for people who lived at Starr Hills to follow their hobbies. We found this had a hugely positive impact on their lives. Comments from people who lived at the home and relatives were very positive. Comments included, “The activities are outstanding what they did for my [relative] was unbelievable.”

We observed staff demonstrated an exceptionally caring, compassionate and kind attitude towards people who lived at the home. People told us staff were very respectful and spent quality time with people. There were many examples of how caring attitudes of staff had a very positive impact on people’s lives. One person who lived at the home said, “They are so kind and what I like is the time and patience they spend with me.” A relative said, “They are brilliant so caring and know just how to treat [relative]. They have given [relative] a new lease of life because of how much attention she has been given.”

Health professionals we spoke with told us how they felt the service provided outstanding care. They were impressed with the knowledge of staff with their attention to end of life care.

At this inspection we found the registered manager had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take appropriate action when required. Staff had received safeguarding adults training and understood their responsibilities to report any unsafe care.

We found recruitment checks were carried out to ensure suitable staff were employed to work at the home and there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. This was confirmed by talking with staff members and looking at records of staff recruitment.

We found sufficient staffing levels were in place to provide support people required. This included staff supporting people with one to one support and to attend hospital appointments. We saw staff members could undertake tasks without feeling rushed when supporting people. Staff also told us they had time to spend with people and that was promoted by the registered manager.

Staff received training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs.

We noted responsible staff dispensed medicines, without interruption and at the correct times they should be administered. Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. People told us they received their medicines at the times they needed them.

Care records we looked at held detailed nutritional risk assessments to protect people from the risk of malnutrition. We observed lunch was organised and a relaxed experience. Comments were positive about the quality of food. They included from people who lived at the home, “We are lucky to have good cooks.” Also, “Lots of choice and of a high quality.”

Staff demonstrated an awareness of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We observed they had positive relationships with people who lived at the home to support them to have as much freedom as possible.

Care plans were organised and had identified the care and support people required. We found they were informative about care people had received. They had been kept under review and updated when necessary to reflect people’s changing needs.

People who used the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available and people said they were encouraged to raise concerns if they had any.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included satisfaction surveys and care reviews. We found people were more than satisfied with the service they received. Comments from people who returned surveys included, ‘No place is ever going to be like your own home, but this is the next best thing.’ Also, ‘I don’t think it could be any better.’

Is the service safe? People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. The service was safe, clean and hygienic.

Is the service effective? People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in put together their own care plans. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People said that they had been involved in writing their care plans and they reflected their current needs.

Is the service caring? People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. People at the home said that they felt their needs were very well met by the staff. We found that people's nutritional needs were met.

Is the service responsive? People completed various activities in and outside the service. Changes to the care and support people needed were made in response to their changing needs.

Is the service well-led? The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way. The service had a quality assurance system; records showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and wanted to ensure it was implemented.

During the inspection we looked at care planning, staffing levels and staff induction training records. We also observed care practices during the day and talked with residents and relatives about the home.

We spoke with people who lived at the home. They told us they could express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care. One resident said, 'The staff and manager are wonderful, nothing is too much trouble.' Staff confirmed to us they also involved people to ensure they received the right care and support.

We observed the staff team providing sensitive and flexible personal care support. The staff were kind and patient and showed a good understanding of the needs of the person in their care.

Relatives we spoke with said their family members were receiving safe and appropriate care which was meeting their needs. One said, 'I visit two of my relatives here and there is no place better.'

There were a range of audits and systems in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided.

People told us they were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support and they felt confident they would be listened to. One person said 'The staff treat me with dignity and respect.'

People told us they were asked for their consent before care was delivered. People were involved in activities both within and away from the home. Several people were taking part in organised activities during our visit.

People said they were confident that staff were trained to do their job properly and they felt safe when being supported by them. There was a suitable and sufficient range of equipment in place to safely meet people's needs and promote their independence.

The home was clean, bright and comfortable throughout.