Archived: Pippins Residential Care Home

This unannounced inspection took place on 31 May 2016. The service was last inspected on 3 December 2013 when it was meeting the requirements that were looked at.

A registered manager was employed at 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. The registered person employed a registered manager although there was no legal requirement to do so. This was because the registered provider is an individual, rather than a company.

People’s personal information was not always stored in a confidential way. However, following the inspection the manager told us they had removed all personal information from communal areas.

Medicines were not always managed safely. People’s medicines were not always ordered in time to ensure stocks were maintained. When medicines were received the total quantity of medicine in stock was not always recorded. Temperatures of the fridge used to store certain medicines were not always recorded. Other aspects of medicine administration were managed safely.

People’s needs were met in a safe and timely way as there were enough staff available. People told us they were happy with staffing levels and told us “Staff are very good, take their time” and “If you ring the bell they always come”. People’s needs were met by kind and caring staff who ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected at all times. People said “This is absolutely the best”, “They look after us well”, “I’m thoroughly spoilt” and “I count my blessings that I am here”.

There were ways for people to express their views about their care. Each person had their care needs reviewed on a regular basis which enabled them to make comments on the care they received and voice their opinions. Some people had completed their own care plans, indicating their needs and preferences. The home operated a key worker system where each person had a nominated member of staff who coordinated their care. Staff told us this helped them build relationships and get to know people well. People knew who their key worker was and could ask them if they needed anything. One person told us they had chosen their key worker. They said “she’s brilliant. She can tell from my face if I’m worried about anything”.

People were encouraged to make suggestions about improving the quality of the service provided. For example, people had requested a box to place outgoing mail into. Such a box had been placed in the hall way.

An activities organiser was employed and there was a range of activities on offer including word games and trips out. People told us they had recently been on a boat trip down the river Dart and had ice cream. During the inspection people were enjoying walking around and sitting in garden. One person said “I like sitting in the garden for fresh air”.

People were supported to maintain good health. A healthy balanced diet was available and people saw their GP when needed. People told us “Food is wonderful. They ask what we would like on the menu” and “It’s a lovely place, good food, good care”.

People told us they felt safe. Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse. Thorough recruitment procedures ensured the risks of unsuitable staff being employed were minimised.

Staff received training that helped them meet people’s needs. For example, staff had received training in moving and transferring, infection control and first aid.

Staff displayed a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This ensured people’s human rights were protected. People were asked for their consent before staff provided personal care.

Relatives and people living at Pippins were confident that if they raised concerns they would be dealt with efficiently. One relative contacted us following the inspection. They wrote in an email ‘We were very satisfied with the way [registered manager and provider] dealt with the matter’.

The registered manager was very open and approachable. Staff told us they felt well supported. The registered manager was keen to improve the service and a member of the local authority’s quality improvement team told us “I’ve always found the manager to be receptive and open to any support and learning to help to develop the service”.

There were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor care. For example, there were regular audits of the environment and care plans. The provider took an active part in the running of the home and they produced a monthly report on the running of the home.

The registered manager was keen to improve the service provided. They told us they were looking at more informal ways to receive feedback from people. Following the inspection they wrote to us and told us they had placed complaint/comment forms in the hallway, lounge and library area. They had also place notebooks on dining room tables for people to write any comments in.

We spoke with seven people who lived there the owner, the manager and two members of staff. People told us that staff were kind and helpful. Comments included, 'It is lovely here, the girls are very kind, nothing is too much trouble'.

People took part in a range of activities and were encouraged to maintain independence. People and their relatives were involved in planning their care, as much as they wished to be. People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. Care plans were reviewed regularly and as necessary. Records showed that prompt referrals were made to health professionals and their advice was followed. Procedures were in place to deal with emergencies.

Pippins was homely, comfortable and well maintained.

There was an effective quality assurance system in place.

People enjoyed their social lives and could choose how to spend their days. People told us they enjoyed the range of activities offered and were involved in the planning of these.

Medication was well managed at the home.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to protect people from abuse. People's health and welfare needs were well met. Risks to people's health and wellbeing were identified and plans were in place to manage these risks. People's needs were met by staff who were skilled, trained and who received supervision. Staff were described as 'very kind', 'great fun' and 'just lovely' by people living at the service.

No complaints had been received by the service but there was a robust procedure in place if needed. People said they knew how to complain and felt satisfied complaints would be dealt with appropriately.