Archived: York House

York House is a purpose built care home providing care for up to a maximum of 36 older people some of whom are living with dementia. The home stands in its own grounds with an enclosed garden and car parking. On the day of our inspection 35 people were living at the home.

The service had a registered manager in place. They were the registered manager for two locations and the deputy manager had been managing the home since October 2015 due to the registered manager concentrating their time at another location. A new manager had recently been appointed for York House. It was their second day of employment when we inspected the home. 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 who lived at the home told us they felt safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable people and understood the action they should take in the event a person was at risk of harm or abuse.

Risk assessments were in place for people although due to the style of the document the information recorded did not always contain much detail.

Staff recruitment was thorough and included a number of pre-employment checks to ensure potential candidates were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Medicines were managed and administered safely to people by staff who had relevant knowledge and skills.

The registered provider had a system in place to ensure staff received an induction and training when they commenced employment and training was periodically refreshed for all staff. There was an on-going programme of supervision and appraisal although this was behind schedule due to the management changes.

Our discussion with the manager and staff showed they had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how they would act in people’s best interests if they lacked capacity to make decisions.

People were supported to eat and drink and were enabled to choose which meal they would like to eat. We observed lunch time on the day of our inspection, people enjoyed their meal and we found the atmosphere to be relaxed.

Everyone we spoke with told us staff were caring and kind. During our inspection we observed staff interactions with people were friendly but professional. Staff supported people to make choices and decisions for example when they got up, went to bed and what they had to eat and drink.

The post of activities organiser was currently vacant although some activities were still being provided for people who lived at the home.

Peoples care plans were person centred, recording likes and dislikes. Care plans were reviewed and updated at regular intervals.

People told us they knew how to complain in the event they were dissatisfied with the service.

The home was undergoing a management change but staff felt supported and the registered provider had ensured management support was provided for the home. There was a system in place to continually assess and monitor the safety and quality of the service provided however, this was not always completed regularly.

During our inspection we spoke with two people who used the service. They told us they were happy with the service and comments included:

'No grumbles at all as far as I'm concerned.'

'She knows I'm being well looked after.'

We spoke with the relatives of two people who used the service and comments included:

'I'm very happy with York House, very happy indeed, the staff, the girls everything. I have a lot to thank them for as they brought him back.'

'In this last couple of months since they [registered manager] have been there things have improved.'

'He [registered manager] is very good at communicating.'

'On the whole we feel the care has got a lot better.'

We saw that there were sufficient levels of staff employed by the provider. However, there were issues around the number of staff deployed during the evening period.

We were able to review a wide range of quality assurance audits and risk assessments. This included care plan audits and feedback from relatives.

We saw that records were stored in a secure office but were accessible by care staff.

People who use the service told us, 'The carers are all lovely and the food is nice.' One person said, 'They look after me quite well, I have no complaints.'

One relative said, 'All the staff are approachable and nothing is too much trouble.' Another commented, 'The food is really nice, you cannot fault the cook, and she looks after people. Birthdays are celebrated and the cook makes cakes.' We were told that, 'The home was dirty but over the last few months it has improved.'

We spent a period of time observing people's experiences of living in the home, and saw that people were relaxed and there was gentle banter between them and the staff. Care was delivered in a kind and reassuring manner. Staff were patient and respectful when people found it difficult to communicate their needs.