Temple Grove Nursing Home

Updated 18 January 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

There was an inspector and an inspection manager on the first day and two inspectors on the second day.

Service and service type

Temple Grove is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. At Temple Grove, the registered manager was also the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with ten people and six relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 20 members of staff including the registered manager, quality and training manager, senior team leaders, welfare leads for staff and people, domestic staff, nurses, mental capacity lead and care staff. We also spoke with six visiting professionals, including a GP.

We reviewed a range of records. This included six people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

Updated 18 January 2020

About the service

Temple Grove is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to younger and older people. The service can support up to 65 people, 55 people were being supported at the time of inspection.

Temple Grove accommodates people across four units, each of which has separate adapted facilities. One of the wings specialises in providing care to people who require support with complex care needs, such as spinal injuries. The service also provides respite support to people. Respite is when a service provides care to a person for a period of time, without them living there permanently. This could include support when coming out of hospital.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Everyone we spoke with and heard from gave the highest feedback about the service and the kindness and compassion that staff showed people. A person told us, “I’m not treated as just a resident, I’m treated as my own special person.” Another person said, “Couldn't think of a nicer nursing home. Always ‘life and laughter’ here. I'd recommend to absolutely everyone.”

People felt listened to and the personalised dedicated support had a profound impact on their wellbeing. Relatives told us how much this meant to them and their loved ones. Staff had considered every aspect of support required for end of life care and created innovative ways to support people and their relatives during this difficult time. Activities were thoughtfully planned centred on people’s interests and staff promoted strong links with the community.

Everyone we spoke to was highly complementary about the registered manager and how the service was run. One relative said, “The registered manager really has her finger on the pulse. She is so caring.” The management team spoke with great passion about the service and encouraged staff to provide the best possible care to people.

The registered manager and quality training manager used creative ways to listen to people’s views and acted on them to improve. Community involvement was strongly promoted and opened up new networking opportunities for people.

The management team had good oversight of what happened day to day. They had developed tools to help track the quality of the care and support, so they could improve it. There was a culture of everyone being involved in the continuous improvement of the service.

Equality and diversity were deeply embedded into the home. People’s differences were highly respected and supported. Staff worked hard to promote people’s independence mitigating any risks, so they were not restricted from doing what they wanted to do. A relative told us, “My relative is treated as a person, not a number. Staff are absolutely brilliant and care so much.”

People and relatives told us they felt safe and were supported by a strong, knowledgeable staff team. People were involved in recruiting staff, so they had a say about who would support them. People received their medicines safely and were supported to have as much control as they wanted over their medicines.

Everyone we spoke to was confident that staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. People were supported by a range of health and social care professionals to improve their wellbeing. People’s nutritional needs were consistently met, and they were positive about the quality and quantity of food provided.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 31 January 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.