The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Deer Park Nursing Home

Rydon Road, Holsworthy, Devon, EX22 6HZ (01409) 254444

Provided and run by:
Holsworthy Healthcare LLP

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile
Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

21 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We met or spoke to 18 people who used services, spoke to eight relatives, talked with the staff on duty and checked the provider's records. One person using the service said, 'I love being here'.

We saw people's privacy and dignity being respected at all times. We saw and heard staff speak to people in a way that demonstrated a good understanding by staff of people's choices and preferences. One person said, 'I can have a female carer if I wish'.

Staff we spoke with were clear about the actions they would take should they have any concerns about people's welfare.

We looked at care records for four people. We spoke to staff about the care given, looked at records relating to them, met with them and observed staff working with them.

We saw that people's care records described their needs and how those needs were met. This meant that people's care and welfare needs were being recorded when given and this provided an audit trail of the care provided. We saw that Deer Park Nursing Home held all records securely to protect people's confidentiality.

During our visit to the home we saw sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people living in the home. We spoke with most of the staff working during our visit and all agreed that the home had sufficient staff to meet peoples care needs. However staff, people who used the service and some relatives felt the home needed more staff to spend time sitting and talking with people.

We saw that medication was administered by suitably qualified nurses. People were not protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had not made appropriate arrangements in place to administer and record medication.

26 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We brought the scheduled inspection forward because we received concerning information. This suggested people were not being moved safely, there were insufficient staff on duty and people were not given a choice about their lives in the home.

We visited the home on 26 February 2013 and spoke with 27 people living in the home, 4 visitors, 16 staff, 2 kitchen staff, 2 activities workers, 2 administrators and the manager. Some people were unable to comment directly on their care so we spent time with them to help us understand what life was like at the home.

People told us they were encouraged to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. They told us 'they always ask me what clothes would you like to wear and what would you like to do today?' and 'I could not wish for anywhere better'. Visitors said 'the staff know exactly what she likes to eat and give it to her, living here has given her a new lease of life'.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a safe way. People told us they felt 'safe and well cared for'. We saw people were moved safely. At mealtimes, people needing it had constant support. People told us there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet their needs with comments like 'I know I can ring and they'll come quickly'. Call bells were answered quickly and staff did not appear to be rushed when delivering care for people.

The provider was compliant with the outcomes.

20 December 2011

During a routine inspection

We spoke with 13 people who use the service and three of their relatives. Overall they told us that they were very happy with the care and support they received and the staff were polite and easy to communicate with.

People commented that they were fully involved and supported to make decisions about their care. For example, plans of care were reviewed with people and on occasions their relatives (designated advocates), and their needs and wishes taken into account. People said that they were encouraged to maintain their independence and feel fully involved in their care.

People told us that their care and welfare needs were being well met and relatives spoken to confirmed this. Comments included:

'The girls are very helpful here.'

'The staff are good to me.'

"The staff give me help when I ask for it.'

'They are looking after me very well.'

'I have every confidence in the staff ' they seem to know what they are doing and are well trained to undertake nursing tasks.'

'The home calls in the doctor whenever needed, in fact on four consecutive days recently. The doctor was marvellous and the staff magnificent, resulting in a great improvement in my relative's health.'

'The staff phone if there is a change in X's state of health or if there are concerns.'

People we saw and spoke with confirmed that they felt safe and supported by staff at the home and had no concerns of their ability to respond to safeguarding concerns. They felt that their human rights were upheld and respected by staff.

People we spoke with said that staff were supportive and helpful. Staff knew how to respond to specific health and care needs and were observed to be competent in the work they were doing. Staff were able to speak confidently about the care practices they delivered and understood how they contributed to people's health and wellbeing.

People we spoke with confirmed that the home seeks their views about the quality of the service through questionnaires and face-to-face conversations. We were able to see that where improvements were needed they were followed up by the home.

All the people we spoke with knew how to make a complaint and were entirely confident in the manager's ability to address the issues.

20 July 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

We carried out a visit to Deer Park Nursing Home as we had received information indicating that equipment used by staff in the home was not safe and not repaired or replaced when required. In particular wheelchairs were not properly maintained with missing footplates and sides, flat tyres and brakes that did not work; bed rails were faulty and could not be raised or lowered properly; the tea trolley was not safe for moving hot liquids around; toilet commodes were broken; the sluices in the home did not work; bedding used by the people living in the home was damaged and torn and some bedrooms were too small to manoeuvre a hoist safely.

We spoke to one person living in the home who said that the staff made sure he was comfortable and safe when he was assisted to move.

We found that the wheelchairs we saw were in reasonable condition, the bed rails tested did move up and down, staff confirmed the tea trolley was safe, and we did not see any broken commodes or torn bedding. We were told that the sluices would be repaired or replaced in due course but, in the meantime, adequate infection control procedures were in place. The Registered Manager confirmed that none of the bedrooms were too small to manoeuvre a hoist safely.