Archived: Generals Meadow

Updated 8 December 2016

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 registered persons were 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.

Before the inspection, the registered persons completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks them to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also examined other information we held about the service. This included notifications of incidents that the registered persons had sent us since the last inspection. These are events that happened in the service that the registered persons are required to tell us about.

We visited the service on 9 November 2016. The inspection was unannounced and the inspection team consisted of a single inspector.

During the inspection we spoke with five people who lived in the service. We also spoke with a senior care worker and four care workers. In addition, we spoke with both of the registered persons and with their office manager. We observed care that was provided in communal areas and looked at the care records for four of the people who lived in the service. We also looked at records that related to how the service was managed including staffing, training and quality assurance.

After the inspection visit we spoke by telephone with three relatives. We did this so that they could tell us their views about how well the service was meeting people’s needs and wishes.

Updated 8 December 2016

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 9 November 2016.

Generals Meadow can provide accommodation and personal care for 19 older people. There were 17 people living in the service at the time of our inspection.

The service was run by Mr and Mrs Peacock. They made up a partnership and together they were the registered provider. One of the partners was also the 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. In this report when we speak both about the partners and the registered manager we refer to them as being, ‘the registered persons’

Staff knew how to respond to any concerns that might arise so that people were kept safe from abuse. People had been helped to avoid the risk of accidents and medicines were safely managed. There were enough staff on duty and background checks had been completed before new staff were appointed.

Although new staff had not fully received all of the training recommended by a nationally recognised model, established staff had received refresher training. Staff had the knowledge and skills they needed to care for people in the right way. People had been assisted to eat and drink enough and had been supported to receive all of the healthcare assistance they needed.

The registered persons had ensured that people's rights were respected by helping them to make decisions for themselves. The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how registered persons apply the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and to report on what we find. These safeguards protect people when they are not able to make decisions for themselves and it is necessary to deprive them of their liberty in order to keep them safe. In relation to this, the registered persons had taken the necessary steps to ensure that people only received lawful care that respected their rights.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff recognised people’s right to privacy, promoted their dignity and respected confidential information.

People had been consulted about the care they wanted to receive and they had been given all of the assistance they needed. This included people who lived with dementia and who could become distressed. People had been helped to pursue their hobbies and interests and there was a system for quickly and fairly resolving complaints.

Although some quality checks were not fully recorded other evidence showed that the registered persons had regularly checked to make sure that people were reliably receiving all of the care they needed. The service was run in an open and inclusive way, good team work was promoted and staff were supported to speak out if they had any concerns. People had benefited from staff acting upon good practice guidance.