Cubbington Mill

Updated 8 February 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

On 7 January 2020 one inspector carried out this inspection visit, one specialist advisor and one expert by experience. The specialist advisor was a nurse experienced in supporting older people and the expert by experience has experience of caring for someone in this type of setting.

Service and service type

Cubbington Mill is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service doesn’t currently have a registered manager, as the previous registered manager had left the service on 31 December 2019. A new manager has been appointed and is in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. Once registered they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included statutory notifications sent to us by the provider and information received from the public and health agencies. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with nine people and six visiting relatives to get their experiences of what it was like living at Cubbington Mill. We spoke with one visiting healthcare professional. We spoke with two nurses, one-unit lead, a care team leader and three care staff (in the report we refer to them as staff). We also spoke with the manager, a registered manager from another of the providers homes (who was supporting the manager) and the deputy manager. The deputy manager was also the clinical lead. In the report, we refer to them as deputy manager.

We reviewed a range of records related to five people’s care such as care plans, risk assessments and daily records. We reviewed provider records related to the management of the service, audits, complaints, evidence of activities people were involved in as well as how people’s feedback led to providing good care outcomes.

Updated 8 February 2020

About the service

Cubbington Mill is registered to provide accommodation, nursing and personal care for up to 56 older people, including people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection visit there were 44 people living at the home. The home has two floors with numerous communal areas and a main dining area on the ground floor. People had their own bedrooms and had access to a garden.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We found some improvements were still needed to improve the quality of risk management through better and clear recording. This included more effective monitoring of people who required support to maintain skin integrity through repositioning and pressure relieving equipment. This was a concern at the last inspection and although no one had any pressure areas this time, we would expect a robust process to be in place. We raised our concerns to the manager and deputy manager. Following our visit, the regional director sent us an immediate action plan which would address these concerns.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff knew how to protect people from poor and abusive practice. Not everyone felt staffing levels met their needs, however staff and our observations during our visit showed staff met people’s needs and requests for assistance. Staff followed safe principles for infection control and their knowledge, training and practice meant the potential of cross infections was minimised.

Staff were confident in their abilities to support people. Staff training included refresher training alongside an induction for new staff. One to one supervision meetings and regular staff meetings gave staff the opportunity to discuss any developmental opportunities.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us staff were respectful, kind and caring with their choices being respected. Care plans provided staff with the information and guidance they needed but in some examples, clearer recording would ensure staff support remained consistent. People were supported by other health professionals and agencies.

People were involved in pursing their interests and hobbies. People’s life history information was used to inform staff about their interests. Regular activity sessions were planned and further work was planned to increase people and family’s engagement.

Staff supported people who required end of life care and people’s advanced wishes and preferences were respected. Our planning identified a higher than average number of expected deaths at this home. The deputy manager was confident this was because of the high number of admissions in the last 12 months for people who needed palliative and end of life care.

There were opportunities for people and relatives to give their feedback on the service. The provider’s complaints policy was recently updated and displayed so people had the information they needed. The new manager had plans to improve the service and although not every person or staff member had chance to meet the manager, those who had, gave us positive comments.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 22 January 2019). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found enough improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.