Archived: St Andrews House

Updated 11 August 2017

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.

This was a comprehensive which looked at all five key questions.

This inspection took place on 18 July 2017 and was unannounced. One adult social care inspector undertook the inspection.

Prior to the inspection, we reviewed the information held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and statutory notifications we had received. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the service is required to tell us about by law. Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This form asks the provider to give some key information about the service for instance, what the service does well, as well as any improvements they plan to make.

At the time of the inspection 19 people were living at the service. We used a range of different methods to help us understand people's experience. We looked at care records for three people to check they were receiving their care as planned. We looked at how the service managed people’s medicines, the quality of care provided, as well as records relating to the management of the service. These included three staff personnel files, staff training records, duty rotas, and quality assurance audits. During the inspection we spoke with 11 people, four staff, the registered manager, and two visiting healthcare professionals. Following the inspection, we received feedback from the local authority’s quality improvement team.

Updated 11 August 2017

St Andrews House provides care for up to 24 older people who may be living with dementia or mobility needs. On the day of inspection there were 19 people living at the service.

The service is a large well maintained detached property set in large grounds. Accommodation is provided over two floors with a passenger lift and stair lift to help people easily reach the upper floor.

At the last inspection in July 2015 the service was rated as good. At this inspection in July 2017 we found the service remained good.

Why the service is rated Good

As the service was rated as Good at the last inspection a shorter report has been produced to reflect the fact the service continues to provide good care.

People remained safe at the home. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs in a timely way. Risks were assessed to ensure people and their environment were kept safe. People’s medicines were managed safely. Robust recruitment procedures were in place to protect people from the risks of employing unsuitable staff. People were protected from the risks of abuse because staff knew how to recognise and report any suspicion of abuse.

People continued to receive effective care because staff were trained and skilled in meeting people’s needs. People received regular visits, when necessary, from healthcare professionals. People were supported to have choice and control over their lives and to receive healthy well balanced meals.

People continued to receive a caring service. We observed staff to be kind, caring and respectful of people’s privacy and dignity. People described staff as “Really caring” and “Excellent.” People and their representatives were involved in planning their care.

The service remained responsive to people's individual needs. People received person-centred care and staff knew people’s needs well. People were supported to continue with previous interests. There was a regular programme of activities on offer and staff spent time with people individually. There was a system in place to manage any concerns that were raised.

The service continued to be well led. People knew the registered manager well and staff told us they were well supported. Staff knew the values of the service and told us how they ensured they put them into practice. There was an effective system in place to monitor the quality of the service provided.