Canwick Court Care Centre

Canwick Court care Centre is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. It provides accommodation for older people including people living with dementia. The home can accommodate up to 30 people. At the time of our inspection there were 22 people living in the home. Accommodation is provided in two units, including a unit for people living with dementia.

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

There was a process in place to carry out quality checks. These were carried out on a regular basis.

The home was clean, and staff understood how to prevent and manage infections. The environment was not consistently adapted to support people living with dementia.

There was enough staff to support people. Appropriate employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Arrangements were in place to safeguard people against harm. People said they felt safe.

People enjoyed the meals and their dietary needs were catered for. This information was detailed in people’s care plans. Staff followed guidance provided to manage people's nutrition and pressure care. People were supported by staff who had received training to ensure their needs could be met. Staff received regular supervision to support their role.

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. However best interest decisions were not always completed.

People had good health care support from external professionals. When people were unwell, staff had raised the concern and acted with health professionals to address their health care needs. At the time of inspection people did not have access to a range of activities and leisure pursuits.

We saw evidence of caring relationships between staff and people who lived at the home. Staff were aware of people's life history and preferences and used this information to develop relationships. People felt well cared for by staff. Care records were personalised and were regularly reviewed.

The provider had displayed the latest CQC rating at the home and on their website. When required notifications had been completed to inform us of events and incidents.

More information is in the detailed findings below.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published February 2017). At this inspection the service remains rated Good.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

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.

Staff interacted well with people. People and their relatives told us that they felt safe and well cared for. Staff knew how to keep people safe. The provider had systems and processes in place to support staff if they were concerned about the safety and welfare of the people in their care.

Medicines were administered safely. Medication documentation was not always completed consistently which created an increased risk to people’s safety.

We saw that staff obtained people’s consent before providing care to them. The provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The MCA provides the legal framework to assess people’s capacity to make certain decisions, at a certain time. If the location is a care home the Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the DoLS, and to report on what we find.

We found that people’s health care needs were assessed and care planned and delivered to meet those needs. People had access to healthcare professionals such as the district nurse and GP and also specialist professionals. People had their nutritional needs assessed and were supported with their meals to keep them healthy. People had access to drinks during the day and had choices at mealtimes. Where people had special dietary requirements we saw that these were provided for.

There were usually sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and staff responded in a timely and appropriate manner to people. Staff were kind and sensitive to people when they were providing support. Staff were provided with training on a variety of subjects to ensure that they had the skills to meet people’s needs. The provider had a training plan in place and staff had received supervision. People were encouraged to enjoy a range of social activities. They were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.

Staff felt able to raise concerns and issues with management. Relatives were aware of the process for raising concerns and were confident that they would be listened to. Regular audits were carried out and action plans put in place to address any issues which were identified. Accidents and incidents were recorded and investigated. The provider had informed us of notifications. Notifications are events which have happened in the service that the provider is required to tell us about.

To help us to understand people's experiences we used our Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI allows us to spend time observing and helps us to record how people spend their time.

A relative said, "It is very good here, they look after my mum well.'

Overall we observed that people were supported by sufficient skilled and experienced staff who understood their roles and responsibilities. We observed care and saw staff were responsive to people's needs.

We saw from the care plans and observations people received care which was appropriate to their needs.

People told us the staff were caring and looked after them well.

When we looked at the records we found they detailed the care people required and care was delivered safely to meet people's needs.

We saw people received appropriate nutrition in order to meet their needs.

We looked at the process for administering medicines and saw it was safe and effective.

We found medicines were administered and stored safely.

Overall we observed people were supported by skilled and experienced staff who understood their roles and responsibilities.

We observed care and saw staff were responsive to people and interacted with them positively.

We spoke with a relative. They told us the staff were caring.

We observed staff supporting people and saw they were caring and responsive to people's needs.

We saw staff explained the care they were giving to people. For example when they offered medicines to people they explained what they were.

When we looked at the records we found they accurately reflected the care people were being given or required.

We found the service was well led and staff received appropriate training to support them to effectively provide care to people.

At our last inspection of Canwick Court Care Centre on 19 July 2012 we issued a compliance action,. We issues the compliance action because we were concerned people were not protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment as records were not completed fully.

We found there were numerous gaps in fluid, food and positioning charts and records did not reflect the care people should have received according to their care plans.

Following this visit we received an action plan from the provider to address the issues. In the action plan the provider said they would audit all positional, fluid and food charts randomly on a daily basis.

During this visit we spoke with the registered manager and deputy manager. We looked at three care records and six fluid and food charts. We also checked on the progress the manager had outlined in their action plan.

We found that overall records were being completed in a timely and accurate manner and reflected the care outlined in the care plans.