The Care Quality Commission inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about visiting arrangements and whistleblowing concerns in relation to the management of the service. A decision was made to inspect the home and examine those risks.
The inspectors found the provider's policy for visiting arrangements in the home was not always in line with government guidance. However, the registered manager had used innovative ways to ensure regular meaningful visits still happened during the pandemic.
"After our inspection, the provider changed their policy to ensure it was in line with government guidance,” the report said.
"We spoke with twelve people who use the service, fourteen of their relatives and fifteen staff including the registered manager, deputy manager, administrative staff, quality assurance manager and care staff.
"We 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 reviewed six people's care records, four staff recruitment files, staff training records, multiple medicine records and other documents related to the running of the home,” they said.
“After the inspection we continued to speak with the registered manager about visiting arrangements for the home and discuss a complaint investigation.”
The private care home, which cares for 77 people, offers personal and nursing care. The inspectors – whose previous inspection was in January 2018 when it was rated ‘good’ – found that residents were supported by staff who understood what actions to take to keep people safe.
Staff had received training around safeguarding and understood how to recognise and escalate safeguarding concerns. Staff were safely recruited and systems had been developed to determine safe staffing levels.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were supported by staff who had the right skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff were responsive to changes in people's needs and liaised with healthcare professionals to support people's health and well-being. People were supported to receive meals of their choosing and to access the healthcare they needed.
People were supported with care that was kind and caring. Staff knew the people living at the home and what was important to them. People were treated with dignity and respect and were encouraged to retain their independence.
Inspectors found residents received care that was responsive to their needs. They had access to activities based on their interests and felt an integrated part of their local community. There were systems in place that enabled concerns or complaints to be raised and responded to.
Residents received a service that was well-led. There were a number of effective monitoring systems in place that measured the quality and safety of the service..
The key inspection points – all of which received a good rating – were safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.
For more details, please see the full report, which was published on June 14, here.