Archived: Quarry House

Updated 7 January 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 19 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 7 January 2021

This comprehensive inspection took place on 27 and 28 November 2018. The inspection was unannounced.

Quarry House is registered to provide accommodation for up to 65 people who need nursing or personal care. At the time of our visit, 61 people were living in the home. The home is arranged over four floors. Each floor is separated into two units. A central staircase and two lifts provide access to each floor. The provider is also registered to provide personal care to people living in self-contained purpose-built apartments next to the home. At the time of our inspection one person living at those apartments received the regulated activity personal care.

The registered manager had been in post since July 2017. 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.

At the inspection of October 2017 significant improvements had been made but further improvements were required. We also needed to be satisfied the improvements that had been made would be sustained. We found that management of medicines required further improvement and risks assessments required more detail to protect people from unnecessary harm. Training had improved but staff still required training in how to care for people with dementia. Consent to treatment and support was not clearly evidenced. Systems in place to monitor and evaluate the service needed to improve. Following the inspection, the provider sent us an action plan explaining how they would address our concerns and what action would be taken.

At this inspection we found continued significant improvements had been made and all previous breaches in regulations had been met. This meant the overall rating of the service had changed from Requires Improvement to Good.

Why the service is rated good

People now received a service that was safe. The registered manager and staff understood their role and responsibilities to keep people safe from harm. People were supported to take risks, promote their independence and follow their interests. Risks were assessed and plans put in place to keep people safe. There was enough staff to safely provide care and support to people. Checks were carried out on staff before they started work to assess their suitability to support vulnerable people. Medicines were well managed and people received their medicines as prescribed. The home was exceptionally clean and staff followed infection control procedures.

Improvements had been made to promote and provide an effective service. Staff received supervision and the training required to meet people’s needs. Arrangements were made for people to see a GP and other healthcare professionals when they needed to do so. The registered manager and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and, worked to ensure people's rights were respected. People were supported to enjoy a healthy, nutritious, balanced diet whilst promoting and respecting choice.

The service remained caring and put people at the heart of everything they did. We were introduced to people throughout our visit and they welcomed us. They were relaxed, comfortable and confident in their home. The feedback we received from them was extremely positive throughout. Those people who used the service expressed satisfaction and spoke well about the staff. Staff had a good awareness of individuals' needs and treated people in a warm and respectful manner. They were knowledgeable about people's lives before they started using the service. Every effort was made to enhance this knowledge so that their life experiences remained meaningful.

The service continued to be responsive. People received person centred care and support. Regular monitoring and reviews meant that referrals had been made to appropriate health and social care professionals. Where necessary care and support had been changed to accurately reflect people's needs and improve their health and wellbeing. People were offered a range of activities both at the service and in the local community. People were encouraged to make their views known and the service responded by making changes.

The service had improved and people benefitted from a service that was well led. The director, registered manager, deputy and staff team maintained a clear focus on continually seeking to improve the service people received. Good quality assurance systems were in place and based upon regular, scheduled audits. These identified any action required to make improvements. This meant the quality of service people received was monitored on a regular basis and, where shortfalls were identified they were acted upon.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.