The Denby at Denby Dale

Updated 2 February 2019

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 is 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 29 November and 5 December 2018. The first day of our inspection was unannounced and was carried out by two adult social care inspectors. Day two was announced and was completed by two adults 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.

We spoke with a total of seven people and two visiting relatives to ask about their experience of this home. We also spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager, area quality director, six other members of staff and two visiting health professionals. We looked at five care plans in detail.

Before our inspection, we reviewed all the information we held about the home. We contacted the local authority and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

Before the inspection, the registered provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

Updated 2 February 2019

The Denby at Denby Dale provides care for up to a maximum of 47 older people. The home is purpose built and has bedrooms and communal space over three floors. The home stands in its own grounds with a garden seating area. This inspection took place on 29 November and 5 December 2018. On both days of our inspection, 42 people were living at the home.

At our last inspection we rated the service overall as good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the overall rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The Denby at Denby Dale 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.

At the time of our inspection the home had a registered manager. 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.

People felt safe living at this home and staff knew how to identify and report abuse as they had received safeguarding training. Safe recruitment procedures were in place to ensure staff were suitable to provide care for vulnerable people. Risks to people had been assessed, monitored and reviewed which enabled risks to be reduced, where possible.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. People told us their needs were met and staff didn’t forget them if they requested assistance whilst staff were supporting other people. People consistently told us how pleased they were with the assistance from staff who provided their care. We saw warm interactions between staff and people which were kind and respectful.

The privacy and dignity of people was maintained and we saw examples of this during our inspection. People’s equality, diversity and human rights were upheld by staff. Religious events took place in the home which enabled people to maintain their beliefs. End of life care needs were being met.

The activities provision was well received as this was varied and staff included people who stayed in their room. Trips into the community were taking place every week and links had been formed with local businesses and other partners.

The registered manager was approachable and well liked. They provided strong leadership in the home and where governance systems identified aspects of the service which could be improved, they took appropriate action. People were consulted through meetings, surveys and other feedback and we found their views were acted on. The registered manager provided examples of where systems had changed as a result of lessons learned.

Care plans contained sufficient information for staff to provide effective care. The registered manager actively involved people and their relatives in care reviews. Complaints were fully investigated and responded to in writing.

Staff receiving ongoing support through induction, training and supervision. Staff felt able to raise concerns through supervision and at staff meetings which demonstrated these were two-way discussions.

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.

Records showed people received assistance to access a range of healthcare professionals. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and specific dietary needs were being met. The storage, administration and disposal of medicines was found to be safe as staff had received training for this and had been assessed as competent.