Archived: Cossins House Care Home

Updated 22 April 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 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.

We visited the home on 23 March 2016 and it was an unannounced inspection.

We reviewed the Provider Information Record (PIR) and previous inspection reports before the inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the home, what the home does well and improvements they plan to make. This enabled us to ensure we were addressing potential areas of concern.

Before the inspection we gathered information about the home by contacting the local authority safeguarding and quality assurance team. We also reviewed records we held which included notifications, complaints and any safeguarding concerns. A notification is information about important events which the home is required to send us by law.

The inspection was conducted by three inspectors. We spoke to eight people living at the home, three relatives, nine members of staff, the deputy manager, the registered manager and the regional manager. We observed care and support in communal areas and, on invitation from the person who lived in them, looked at two of the cottages and two bedrooms. We looked at care records, risk assessments, medicines administration records, accident and incident records, minutes of meetings, three staff records, complaints records, policies and procedures and external and internal audits. After the inspection we spoke with one health care professional.

We last inspected on 9 June 2014 and found no concerns.

Updated 22 April 2016

This was an unannounced inspection that took place on 23 March 2016.

Cossins House Care Home is registered to provide accommodation for up to 24 older people. At the time of our visit, there were 21 people living at the home. The majority of the people who live at the home were independent but required some support from staff, in addition the home was able to offer care for people who required additional support . The home also provides end of life care. The accommodation is provided over two floors that were accessible by stairs and a lift. There are also three bungalows in the grounds of the service where people lived and were supported by staff.

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.

People told us they were safe at the service. Staff had a good understanding about the signs of abuse and were aware of what to do if they suspected abuse was taking place. There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm.

There was sufficient numbers of staff deployed who had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices were safe and relevant checks had been completed before staff started work.

Medicines were managed, stored and disposed of safely. Any changes to people’s medicines were prescribed by the person’s GP and administered appropriately.

Fire safety arrangements and risk assessments for the environment were in place to help keep people safe. The home had a business contingency plan that identified how the home would function in the event of an emergency such as fire, adverse weather conditions, flooding or power cuts.

Staff were up to date with current guidance to support people to make decisions. Where people had restrictions placed on them these were done in their best interests using appropriate safeguards. Staff had a clear understanding of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) as well as their responsibilities in respect of this.

Staff had the skills and experience which were necessary to carry out their role. Staff had received appropriate support that promoted their development. We found the staff team were knowledgeable about people’s care needs. People told us they felt supported and staff knew what they were doing.

People had enough to eat and drink and there were arrangements in place to identify and support people who were nutritionally at risk. People were supported to have access to healthcare services and were involved in the regular monitoring of their health. The provider worked effectively with healthcare professionals and was pro-active in referring people for assessment or treatment.

Staff involved and treated people with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. People’s preferences, likes and dislikes had been taken into consideration and support was provided in accordance with people’s wishes. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and promoted when personal care was undertaken. End of life care for people was provided in a caring and respectful way.

People’s needs were assessed when they entered the home and on a continuous basis to reflect changings in their needs.

People were encouraged to voice their concerns or complaints about the home and there were different ways for their voice to be heard. Suggestions, concerns and complaints were used as an opportunity to learn and improve the home.

People had access to activities that were important and relevant to them. People were protected from social isolation through systems the home had in place. There were a range of activities available within the home and community.

The provider actively sought, encouraged and supported people’s involvement in the improvement of the home.

People’s care and welfare was monitored regularly to ensure their needs were met within a safe environment. The provider had systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the care provided.

People told us the staff were friendly and management were always approachable. Staff were encouraged to contribute to the improvement of the home. Staff told us they would report any concerns to their manager. Staff felt that management were very supportive.