Archived: Straven House Care Home

Updated 15 May 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Our inspection of Straven House Care Home took place on 20 April 2018 and was unannounced. Following our site visit, we spoke on the telephone with the registered manager on 27 April 2018.

The inspection team comprised two adult social care inspectors and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert-by-experience used on this occasion had experience in caring for older people.

Prior to the inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the home. This included information from the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams and statutory information we had received from the home. The provider had submitted a provider information return (PIR). A PIR gives the provider the opportunity to tell us about the service, what they do well and any planned improvements they intend to make.

We used a variety of methods to gather information about people's experiences at the service. During the inspection, we spoke with six people, one relative and one visitor of people who use the service and a health care professional. We observed care and support and used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at the way people's medicines were managed, looked at four people’s care records, some in detail and others to check specific information. We viewed other records relating to the management of the service such as maintenance records, quality checks and meeting notes. We looked at staff files and training records. We looked around the home at a selection of people's bedrooms and the communal areas. We spoke with four care staff, the cook, the activities co-ordinator, the deputy manager and the provider's area director. Following our visit to the home, we spoke on the telephone with the registered manager of the home on 27 April 2018.

Updated 15 May 2018

Our inspection took place on 20 and 27 April 2018 and was unannounced. There had been a change of provider in 2017 and this was the first inspection since the new provider had registered with the Commission.

Straven House is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Straven House accommodates 24 people in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection there were 17 people living at the service.

There was a registered manager in post although they were on leave at the time of our inspection. We interviewed the registered manager on the telephone on 27 April 2018. 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. A deputy manager was on duty during our inspection who was supported by a registered manager from one of the provider's other services and the provider's area director.

People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People told us they felt safe living at Straven House. We saw procedures were in place to keep people safe, such as reporting and investigating potential abuse, accidents and incidents, and ensuring appropriate risk assessments were up to date. Staff had been trained to recognise and report signs of abuse.

Sufficient staff were employed who received regular training and supervision to make sure people received safe and effective care. Staff were recruited safely to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. People told us staff knew what they were doing and were kind and compassionate. It was clear from our observations that staff knew people well and people were relaxed and comfortable in staff presence. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team.

People received medicines as prescribed and checks were in place to ensure medicines were managed safely. Staff liaised with health care professionals to ensure people received appropriate medical support.

Straven House was clean, tidy and appropriate systems and equipment checks had been made. A programme of refurbishment was underway and people were encouraged to furnish their bedrooms with personal items. People looked smart and well presented.

The service worked within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The management team and staff understood their legal responsibilities under the Act. Decisions were made in people's best interests and people's consent was sought.

People were supported to consume a healthy and varied diet. Choices were offered for each meal and we saw staff encouraged people to drink plenty of fluids daily.

Care records contained detailed and relevant information to ensure people received appropriate care and support. People and/or their relatives were involved in the planning and review of care plans.

People were happy about the care they received at Straven House and knew how to complain if this was necessary. Complaints were investigated and appropriate actions taken.

Checks were made to keep the service running smoothly. These included regular visits from the provider. A service improvement plan was updated with key information and actions from these checks. People were asked their opinion of the quality of the service through regular meetings and an annual survey, from which some improvements were actioned. The management team were keen to drive improvements at the service through meeting with other managers to share best practice and keeping themselves updated with best practice guidelines.