We carried out a review of the data available to us about Shaftesbury Rest Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Shaftesbury Rest Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had worked with families to agree on nominated visitors for people and had facilitated garden visits for non-designated relatives.
The provider had chosen not to admit people into shared rooms. This was to promote social distancing and to make it easier to isolate people in the event of an outbreak.
The registered manager gave information and support to people and staff around Covid-19 testing and vaccines. This helped them to make informed choices about accessing these resources.
At the last inspection on 25 July 2015, the service was rated Good overall and Requires Improvement in the ‘safe’ domain.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall and had made improvements in the ‘safe’ domain, which is now rated good.
The service had a 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.
The registered manager had worked the service for many years and was experienced in their role. They were knowledgeable and passionate about their job and the people living at the service. Staff were friendly and warm towards people and understood their needs well. People told us they enjoyed the company of staff and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood their responsibilities in safeguarding people from harm and how to keep people safe.
There were sufficient numbers of staff in place to meet people’s needs. The provider’s recruitment processes were sufficiently robust to ensure that staff went through appropriate pre-recruitment checks. Staff were supported in their role through training, induction and supervision, which helped them to remain motivated and effective in their role.
Staff encouraged people to remain as independent as possible sought consent from people before providing care and support. People’s ability to make decisions was assessed in line with legal requirements to ensure their rights were protected and their liberty was not restricted unlawfully.
People told us that they liked the food and there was a choice available for them. There were activities available for people, but some people felt these could be developed further in order to meet their preferences.
People were supported to have their healthcare needs met and there were systems in place to safely mange people’s medicines.
Risks to people were assessed and monitored to help keep people safe. Where incidents took place, the registered manager reflected and implemented learning in order to reduce the risk of reoccurrence. The registered manager ensured that CQC were informed about significant incidents which occurred in the home, this was in line with regulatory requirements.
The registered manager sought feedback from people, relatives and staff in order to make improvements to the service. The service had a system of audits and checks in place which monitored the quality and safety of the service.
This inspection was carried out on 25 June 2015 and was unannounced. Shaftesbury Rest Home is registered to provide accommodation and care for a maximum of 17 older people living with dementia and other mental health conditions. At the time of the inspection there were 13 people living at the service. At our last inspection there were no concerns identified.
At the time of the 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.
Shaftesbury Rest Home provides communal areas, a lounge/dining room and separate lounge and kitchen on the ground floor. There were bedrooms on the ground floor and first floor; some of these could be used as shared rooms. At the time of the inspection only one of the shared rooms was occupied by two people. There was a well maintained garden/car park area at the rear of the service which people were able to access. There was also an outdoor facility where people were permitted to smoke. The people were able to access the community independently when they wanted to.
The feedback we received from people was positive. The people who used the service spoke highly of the staff and registered manager. Community professionals were complimentary about the service, and reported positive experiences when dealing with Shaftesbury rest home.
The safety of people who used the service was taken seriously and the registered manager and staff were aware of what actions needed to be taken to ensure everyone’s safety. There were systems in place to ensure that risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were identified and addressed. Medicines were managed safely and people received them at appropriate times but medicines weren’t always stored safely at the time of the inspection People who had diabetes had plans in place should their blood sugar levels drop to below their normal range. However there wasn’t a robust recruitment process in place, as gaps were found in the employment history.
The registered manager ensured that staff had a full understanding of people’s care needs and the skills and knowledge to meet them. People received consistent support from the staff, who all knew them well. People felt safe when receiving the care.
People and relatives had positive relationships with the staff members and were confident in the service. People who used the service felt that they were treated with kindness and were treated with dignity and respect at all times.
People received a service which was based on their personal needs and wishes. Changes in their needs were quickly identified and changes were made to their care plans to reflect this.
The service showed flexibility and responded positively to people’s request. People who used the service were able to make requests and express their views. The manager used the feedback as an opportunity to make changes and improve the service.
The manager demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of effective quality assurance systems. There was a process in place to monitor quality and to understand the experiences who use the service. The manager demonstrated a desire to learn and implement best practice throughout the service.
Staff were motivated and proud of the service. They described a ‘supportive’ and ‘open’ working environment within which they were encouraged to develop their skills and share any concerns and their opinions.
We spoke with staff, reviewed records and observed the care and support people received. We found care and support were provided with people's consent. Staff acted in accordance with legal requirements if they were concerned about restrictions to people's liberty. The service provided effective support that was caring and responsive to people's needs. Procedures were followed to protect people from risks associated with the management of medicines.
People's care records and other records to do with the management of the service were fit for purpose. Records were kept securely and available when required.
We saw that people were cared for on the basis of individual, person-centred care plans, and that they were treated respectfully. They were involved in their initial assessments, care plans and risk assessments, and we saw that they were able to influence their care and treatment. There were efficient staff recruitment and selection process and staffing levels were adequate for the number of people using the service. The provider had effective processes for monitoring the quality of the service provided.