Archived: Norton Lees Hall

Norton Lees Hall is a 40 bedded care home which offers accommodation over two floors for older people and people living with dementia. The home is run by Orchard Care Homes Ltd. It is located in the Norton Lees area of Sheffield close to local amenities and local transport links.

There was no registered manager in place at the time of the inspection; however there was a manager in place who was planning to register to manage the service. 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.

Staff had undertaken safeguarding training and were able to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of how to protect people from harm.

There were risk assessments in place which related to all aspects of people’s needs; however some of these did not identify specific risks and show the measures needed to minimise the risks.

There was sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, other than at lunchtime on the first floor, where there were people who had to wait a significant time for assistance. People had access to a choice of food and drink throughout the day.

The management of medicines was safe and records were well-maintained.

The home was not clean in some areas and there were malodours present in some places.

Staff received all mandatory training and this was regularly refreshed. Staff received supervisions and appraisals.

Mental capacity assessments were not completed correctly and were contradictory to other information about people, which included the applications made for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

Staff were kind, caring and patient and have positive relationships with the people they supported.

People’s dignity was not always protected as people were not asked if they wished to be assisted to the toilet, and people were not always given their own clothes to wear.

Care plans were detailed and person centred, and regularly reviewed, however there was no evidence people were involved in the creation and review of their care plans.

There was a programme of varied activities which we observed people to enjoy, however some people were at risk of social isolation as they remained in their rooms.

Staff felt supported by the management team; however feedback from relatives was that there had been a lack of consistent management in the home for a long period.

Monitoring processes whilst extensive were not consistently carried out and were not effective in identifying issues and ensuring action was taken to achieve the necessary improvement.

Records were not always of an acceptable standard as they lacked detail and did not achieve their purpose because of this.

The provider was not meeting the requirements of five regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

All of the people using the service and their relatives that we spoke with were positive about the home. One comment from a person using the service included, 'I'm quite satisfied here. The food is the best I've known. I'm quite comfortable here. The carers do lots of things for you.'

People using the service and their relatives told us that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured safety and welfare. A comment from a relative included 'I think that care here is second to none. She always looks well presented and healthy.'

All the people and relatives we spoke with said they had no concerns about abuse in the home. One relative told us 'I think it is very safe here, ive no concerns about anything like that.'

We found that appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work and there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

We found that the provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. This was done through learning and impleneting change by auditing, analysis of feedback about the home and investigating complaints and incidents.