Archived: Far End Residential Home

Far End Residential Home 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.

Far End Residential Home is a care home without nursing for up to three people requiring support and personal care by reason of age. At the time of the inspection three people lived at the service. The service is separated into two well defined areas. People are accommodated on the upper floor of the house in large individual bedrooms .There is a shared bathroom, toilet and kitchen with a garden room providing communal living space on the ground floor. The remainder of the lower floor is occupied by the registered manager and general manager who live on the premises. Outside there is a large garden for people to enjoy.

At the last inspection in November 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The home is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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. At the time of the inspection a registered manager was in post and assisted with the inspection.

People continued to receive safe care from the service. Risk assessments were completed and measures taken to reduce identified risks without restricting people’s freedom. Recruitment procedures were followed to ensure as far as possible only suitable staff were employed. Staff were trained to safeguard and protect people. They reported concerns promptly when necessary. People received their medicines safely when they required them.

People continued to receive effective care from staff who were trained and had shown they had the necessary skills to fulfil their role. However, refresher training in topics considered mandatory by the provider was not all completed at the frequency recommended as current best practice. We have made a recommendation that the provider refer to the current best practice guidance on ongoing training for social care staff.

Staff were supported through one to one meetings, appraisals and daily conversations with the managers. Staff were encouraged to seek advice, discuss and review their work and develop their skills and knowledge. People were supported with nutrition and hydration and had sufficient to eat and drink to maintain their health and well-being. People’s healthcare needs were monitored and advice was sought from healthcare professionals whenever necessary. 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.

The service remained caring and people reported staff were kind, caring, compassionate and patient. People’s privacy and dignity were protected and staff treated them with respect. People and when appropriate their relatives, were involved in making decisions about their care.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Staff knew people well and individual care plans were person-centred. They focused on and respected the diverse needs and preferences of each person and their desired outcomes. People knew how to complain and felt they were listened to if they ever raised an issue. The service was working to the accessible information standard. People were supported to engage in meaningful activities of their choice.

The service continued to be well-led. There was an open, friendly and person centred culture. The managers had clear values which they demonstrated by example. They sought and listened to feedback to make improvements in the service. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

We observed people's care plans contained 'consent to care' forms signed by people who use the service. One person told us 'staff don't make me do things.'

We looked at three care plans. They were person centred, reviewed regularly, and included personal risk assessments. One person told us 'It's not like a residential home, it's my home.'

One care worker said 'We provide flexible care. There's a very good staff ratio, so people get a personal service. It's unique and different here. People get to use the grounds, and are very content and happy.'

We saw the home was clean, and staff were aware of actions to take in order to reduce the risk of infection. They had received appropriate training and guidance to maintain suitable infection control.

Staff told us they felt supported by the managers, and received appropriate training to deliver their roles safely. We saw records confirmed training was current. We noted all staff, including the volunteer, received regular supervisions and annual appraisals, and were encouraged to attain further qualifications.

We looked at an annual questionnaire carried out by the providers. This noted people who use the service were satisfied with the care they received, and provided an opportunity to identify any improvements required.