Archived: Marine Parade

Updated 7 June 2018

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 comprehensive inspection took place on 17 and 18 April 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector and one assistant inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed previous inspection reports, notifications and any other relevant information we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). A PIR is information we require providers to send to us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We met five people, spoke with two members of staff, and the registered manager. We sampled records such as two care plans, medicine records, audits and daily notes. Following the inspection, we spoke with two staff members, two relatives and two healthcare professionals.

Updated 7 June 2018

Care service description

18 Marine Parade is a residential care home for seven people with mental health conditions. The service is a detached building situated in a residential area of Whitstable.

18 Marine Parade 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.

Rating at last inspection

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the 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.

Rating at this inspection

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good

Staff had received safeguarding training, to protect people from potential harm and abuse. Risks to people had been assessed, and mitigated, with a focus on supporting people to take positive risks. People and their relatives told us there were sufficient staff to keep people safe. People’s medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely. Improvements had been made when things went wrong, and people were protected by the prevention and control of infection.

People’s needs were met, and staff worked to deliver effective care, following good practice, and working with internal and external agencies. Staff had the knowledge and experience to deliver good outcomes to the people living at the service, and new training was sourced when required. People were supported to live healthier lives, staff encouraged them to be active and they were supported to be as independent as possible in terms of, for example, choosing, purchasing and preparing food. The environment had been adapted to meet people’s individual needs. 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 support this practice.

We observed people being treated with kindness and compassion. Staff had time to have meaningful interactions with people, giving them emotional support when they needed it. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible, and supported to make decisions about their care and treatment. Staff respected people’s privacy and supported them to maintain relationships with those that mattered to them.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. People told us they took part in activities they enjoyed, and accessed the community as frequently as they wanted to. There were systems in place to monitor and respond to people’s concerns, which the provider used to improve the service. Staff had provided support to people at the end of their lives.

People, staff and healthcare professionals told us the service was well run. At the time of our inspection, there was a registered manager in post. 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. There was a positive culture at the service, and staff were united in their commitment to deliver the best outcomes for people. The registered manager understood and met their regulatory responsibility. The registered manager worked in partnership with other agencies, sought feedback from people and acted on their comments to improve the service.