Archived: St George's Park

Updated 12 February 2015

This was an unannounced inspection carried out by two inspectors, a specialist advisor who had a nursing background and an expert by experience who had personal experience of nursing and residential care for older people.

Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service, including information we had asked the provider to send to us prior to our inspection, called the provider information return. This helped us to decide what areas to focus on during our inspection. We contacted the Local Authority Quality Monitoring team. They told us about a safeguarding adult investigation in relation to pressure area care that had taken place in March 2014. People had not been supported appropriately when they developed a pressure area. We looked at how this had been managed since the investigation had been concluded.

During our inspection we spoke with nine people who used the service, three relatives and 18 staff – a combination from the care team, catering staff, the manager, quality assurance manager and clinical lead nurse.  Not all the people we met were able to speak with us about the care they received and their experience of living in the home. Therefore we observed how staff interacted and supported people and looked at some records including staff training records and audits.

During our inspection we observed how staff interacted with people who used the service. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.  

We looked at seven people’s care records to see if their records were accurate and up to date. We also looked at records relating to the management of the home. These included audits and minutes of meetings

Updated 12 February 2015

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, and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

At the last inspection on 3 April 2013 we found that there were no breaches in the legal requirements in the areas we looked at.

St George’s Park was divided into two separate units. One unit provided nursing care and the other unit provided support for residential (non nursing) and people who lived with a dementia type illness. The service provided accommodation for up to 71 older people. The home offers dementia, nursing, residential, respite and end of life care. The home offers a range of communal facilities and each bedroom has an en suite toilet and shower. On the day of the inspection there were 60 people living at the home.

There was no registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has been registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. The provider had appointed a manager, they had applied to be registered with the Care Quality Commission.

We observed that staff had no time to sit with people who lived at the home. Staff time was spent focused on task only. This meant staff did not spend time sitting and talking to people.  During the time of our inspection we observed there were not always sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. For example we saw that one person who required two hourly turns had a gap of not being turned for four hours and fifteen minutes. Staff we spoke with told us staffing levels were not always sufficient in the day. We observed the lunchtime meal which was not a positive experience for all people who lived at the home. This was because staff were rushed on Rydal unit. 

This was a breach of Regulation 22 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We saw that people did not get the support they required at lunch time to ensure they ate their lunch and received sufficient fluids. We also saw that people that required their fluids monitoring did not have this done consistently. This could mean that they were at risk of becoming dehydrated. These issues were a breach of regulation 14 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Staff we spoke with and observations we made throughout the day demonstrated that staff were knowledgeable about individuals and how they preferred their care needs to be met. Staff training was up to date in mandatory topics such as safeguarding vulnerable adults and moving and handling.

We saw staff treat people with respect and their dignity was maintained.

The manager had introduced audits which assessed the quality of the service. For example care plan audits. This meant the manager monitored the effectiveness of care plans on a regular basis and told us action would be taken if anything arose out of an audit.