Archived: Cossins House Care Home

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.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspections, speaking with people who used the service, the staff supporting them, and from looking at records.

For further evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We saw that people who used the service were treated with respect and in a dignified way by staff. We saw that safeguarding procedures where in place and staff understood their responsibilities in safeguarding the people that they cared for.

The service was clean, hygienic and safe from hazards, providing safe access to all areas of the home.

We looked at staff training arrangements that were in place and saw that the staff were provided with all the appropriate training to ensure safe and appropriate care was provided for the people that used the service.

We saw that systems were in place to record, report and monitor incidents and complaints. There were policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, although no applications had been submitted. This ensured that people were protected from the risk of unlawful restraint.

Is the service effective?

People's health care needs were assessed with them whenever possible as required and included their individual care plans and their families as part of that process. Arrangements were in place for people to be supported by other health care professionals, and people`s opinions and views were sought as part of the review process.

Is the service caring?

We saw that people were supported by kind and caring staff who spoke to them in a polite and respectful manner. People told us that the care was "Excellent" and that staff were " Very Kind" and that the care that was given was "Superb"

Staff were able to tell us about the people that they supported. They knew people`s individual histories and support needs without having to refer to the care records. Staff were seen to take time to talk and listen to what people said, and they encouraged people to be independent by encouraging then to take part in activities such as going for walks in the garden.

People`s preferences, interests and diverse needs had been acknowledged and recorded in the care records, and support provided to meet these needs and interests. Family links were maintained and family and friends encouraged to visit.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that people were involved in a variety of activities, and could participate in what ever activity they decided to. People were involved in choosing their meals, and could decide where to eat their meals. for example we saw staff taking meals to people in their rooms in an appropriate manner on trays with the plates covered. This showed that the home understood the importance of responding to peoples individual requests and needs.

Is the service well led?

The manager had a good understanding and knowledge of the needs of the people that used the service, as well as managing the requirements of the home. Staff told us that they were clear about their roles and responsibilities, and that they had a good understanding of the values of the home and the organisation they worked for. Care records were updated regularly to monitor the service that people were receiving. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

We found that the care that was provided to people was in line with their individual needs. On person told us 'The care is tremendous' whilst a relative told us 'You cannot fault the care staff.' We saw that the staff provided care to people in a calm and friendly manner and that people responded in a positive way.

We found that the service looked clean and tidy. We saw that staff wore gloves and aprons when providing personal care. Staff had an understanding of infection controls and the need for them. People and relatives that we spoke with told us that they thought the service always looked clean.

The service had a recruitment process which meant that only people who were suitable were employed to work there.

We found that the service had an effective complaints procedure. All of the people that we spoke with told us that they would speak to the manager if they had any concerns. They told us that the concerns were always addressed.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We tracked the care records of four people who used the service which showed that people were provided with the care and support that they required and preferred to meet their assessed needs.

We saw records relating to safeguarding referrals which demonstrated that the service acted appropriately when concerns about the safety of people who used the service were reported.

People spoken with were complimentary about the approach of the staff who supported them and told us that the staff treated them with respect. One person said, "They are always smiling and professional." Another person said, "The staff are really good."

We saw records confirming that the manager of the service undertook quality monitoring activities on a daily basis. These included records of daily walkarounds and a daily management report to the provider of the service.