Archived: The Mayfield

Updated 11 February 2023

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 Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

The Mayfield is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. The Mayfield is a care home without nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager.

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

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. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with five people who lived at the home, two relatives and six staff members including the registered manager, the new deputy manager, three care staff and the chef. We also spoke with a director and an area manager who was providing support to the service. We observed meals and activities taking place in the communal areas. We looked at four care records, multiple medicines records and five staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A range of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

Updated 11 February 2023

About the service

The Mayfield is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 22 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 23 people in one adapted building.

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

We were not assured the provider had fully managed potential risks to people living at the home. One person’s individual risk assessment and care plan had not been updated to reflect their current needs. We found gaps in the records for weekly testing of the home’s fire alarm system. The home’s laundry room was left unlocked and unstaffed during our inspection which meant there was a risk people could access laundry and other hazardous materials and liquids. We observed gaps under three fire doors that had not been identified by the provider’s recent fire risk assessment.

People’s medicines were safely stored and administered to people at the correct time. Staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) in accordance with current guidance for care homes. The provider was in the process of reviewing and updating people’s individual risk assessments. They had developed a risk assessment to ensure people’s safety was maintained during a refurbishment of the home.

The provider had carried out pre-recruitment checks on staff staff to ensure they were suitable for their roles. Staffing at the home was sufficient to meet people’s needs at the time of this inspection. The provider had deployed additional staff to ensure people were fully supported during the home’s refurbishment. Staff received training in a range of mandatory areas, and this training was refreshed annually.

People’s individual needs were assessed prior to their moving to the home. The provider had a policy of regular reviews of care plans and risk assessments. However, we found these were not always updated to reflect people’s needs. People’s care plans and risk assessments were being reviewed and updated at the time of our inspection, but this work had not yet been completed.

People received support with their health care needs, and we saw recorded evidence of health appointments and referrals. Professionals such as GPs and district nurses regularly visited people living at the home. People ate a healthy diet and were able to choose their meals. Cultural and specially prepared foods were provided to people where they required this.

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.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of care and safety of the service provided to people. However, this had not always identified and acted on potential risks to people. At the time of our inspection the provider was working to improve the quality of their monitoring of the home.

People and their relatives told us they were satisfied with the care and support they received. They spoke positively about the registered manager and staff.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 6 July 2021).

Why we inspected

We received concerns received in relation to safety, hygiene, record keeping and staffing. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe, effective and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

The overall rating for the service has changed from good to requires improvement based on the findings of this inspection.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the safe and well-led sections of this full report.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Mayfield on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Enforcement

We have identified one breach in relation to the management of risk.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.