Background to this inspection
Updated
10 April 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 the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.
This inspection took place on 12 March 2021 and was announced.
Updated
10 April 2021
This comprehensive inspection took place on 7 June 2018 and was unannounced. At our last inspection of the service in April 2017 we found three breaches of regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions of safe, effective and responsive to at least good.
At this inspection we found that the provider had completed those actions and we found the service was meeting the fundamental standards of quality and safety.
Amathea 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. It is a modern two story building set in its own grounds with parking to the front and a private secure garden to the rear. Accommodation and personal care is provided for up to 40 older people with disabilities or with chronic illness, the ground floor unit is designated for the care of people living with dementia.
There was a registered manager in post who had been appointed after the last inspection in April 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.
Improvements to the processes used when employing people had been made that ensured the recruitment of fit and proper persons more robust. All of the required checks of suitability had been completed in a robust manner.
Medicines were being administered and kept safely. We have made a recommendation that the provider ensures that the records for administration of as and when required medications (PRN) include written protocols for their use. To ensure that medications prescribed were being optimised to their best use for the people they were prescribed to.
There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs. Staff training was ongoing and people had received sufficient training to safely support and care for people. Some staff had been supported into extending their roles as champions in areas of their own interests. This increased staff knowledge and in turn ensured people experienced good outcomes. Staff were also supported through regular staff meetings, supervision and appraisals.
We saw that the service worked with a variety of external agencies and health professionals to provide appropriate care and support to meet people’s physical and emotional health needs.
Where safeguarding concerns or incidents had occurred these had been reported by the registered manager to the appropriate authorities and we could see records of the actions that had been taken by the home to protect people.
People’s rights were protected. The registered manager was knowledgeable about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were only deprived of their liberty if this had been authorised by the appropriate body or where applications had been made to do so.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People living in the home were supported to access activities that were made available to them and pastimes of their choice.
Auditing and quality monitoring systems were in place that allowed the service to demonstrate effectively the safety and quality of the home.
We observed staff displayed caring and meaningful interactions with people and people were treated with respect. We observed people's dignity and privacy were actively promoted by the staff supporting them.
Further information is in the detailed findings below