Archived: The Laurels Care Home

Updated 28 July 2017

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 was 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 27 June 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of three adult social care inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

At the time of our inspection there were 30 people living at the home. We spoke with the registered provider, the registered manager, the unit manager, a senior care worker, two care workers and a domestic assistant. We also spoke with two people who used the service and three visiting relatives. This helped us evaluate the quality of interactions that took place between people living in the home and the staff who supported them.

We spent time observing care throughout the service. We also 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.

Prior to the inspection we gathered information from a number of sources. We looked at the information received about the service from notifications sent to the Care Quality Commission by the manager. We spoke with the local authority quality assurance officer who also undertakes periodic visits to the home.

Before our inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service. The provider had completed a provider information return (PIR). This is a document that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make.

We looked at documentation relating to people who used the service, staff and the management of the service. We looked at three people’s written records, including the plans of their care. We also looked at the systems used to manage people’s medication, including the storage and records kept. We looked at the quality assurance systems to check if they were robust and identified areas for improvement.

Updated 28 July 2017

The inspection took place on 27 June 2017 and was unannounced. The home was previously inspected in September 2015. It was overall rated good.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘The Laurels Care Home’ on our website at ‘www.cqc.org.uk’.

The service had a registered manager who had been registered with the Care Quality Commission since April 2015. 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 Laurels Care Home is registered to provide residential care for up to 30 people. On the day of our inspection, there were 30 people living at the home.

People we spoke with were positive about their experiences of living at the home and about staff who worked there. They said they felt safe and were “very happy” with staff who were “kind, caring and easy to chat to.”

There were systems in place to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and could explain to us the procedures they would follow if any concerns were raised. Risks associated with people’s care and support were managed without any undue restrictions, and assessments were completed and reviewed regularly.

Medications were stored and administered safely by staff who had necessary skills and competencies. Medication Administration Records (MAR) were completed clearly and accurately when medicines had been administered, refused or destroyed. There were protocols in place for the use of ‘as and when required’ (PRN) medicines.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. Staff told us they received regular training and support and we saw adequate pre-employment checks were carried out before a staff member commenced employment at the home.

The service followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) Code of practice and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People who used the service were supported to maintain a well-balanced diet and staff were knowledgeable in how to support this. Referrals were made to relevant healthcare professionals, when required, including dieticians, chiropodists and district nurses.

We saw people participated in a range of meaningful daily activities both in and outside of the home that promoted independence and encouraged social interaction.

There was a calm and caring atmosphere in the home throughout the inspection, with people chatting to each other, visitors and staff. Staff spoke with people in a kind and warm manner and people were relaxed in the presence of staff.

The complaints policy was clear and available for people, and contained details of how to raise a complaint. We saw that concerns and complaints were addressed and responded to in a timely manner. People we spoke with said they felt there was no need to complain and that they were happy at the home.

Auditing systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. Action reports were clear and contained dates for completion of each action identified. These action reports were checked each month to determine progress made.