Archived: Orione House

Updated 23 March 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.

The inspection took place on 6 February 2017 and was unannounced. There was a further visit on 9 February 2017 to conclude the inspection. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held on the service including previous reports, notifications and feedback from the public. During the inspection we observed care practice and tracked the care provided through looking at records and care plans for four people.

We spoke with the manager, the chief executive, five care staff, and four support staff. We also spoke with seven people who used the service and two relatives.

We reviewed the home’s policies and procedures, including medicines procedures and accident procedures. We also viewed the care records of five people and three staff records.

Updated 23 March 2017

We inspected Orione House on 6 February 2017 and 9 February 2017. The inspection was unannounced on the first day and the second day was a continuation of the inspection. There had been a previous inspection of this service on 17 February 2015 where all of the regulations we inspected were met.

Orione House provides accommodation and personal care for up to 34 older people, including people living with dementia. At the time of inspection 25 people were using the service. The service is provided by Orione Care, the working title for the charity "Sons of Divine Providence." The home also has facilities and equipment to support people who use wheelchairs or hoists.

The home was managed by a registered manager. 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.

The service provided safe care for people. Although only a few people we spoke to could personally recall being involved in risk assessments or care planning, records showed that people who lived in the home had been involved in risk assessments and in planning the support they needed as far as they were able. The manager and staff had made some changes to the way people’s care needs and plans were developed which improved the overall person centred approach to care. A serious incident relating to a fall had been the subject of an external investigation and had resulted in a review and retraining of staff in the home’s policy and procedure regarding falls.

Care plans contained information about the health and social care support people needed and records showed they were supported to access other professionals when required. People were involved in making decisions about their care. Where people's needs changed, the provider responded and reviewed the care provided

The building was free from hazards and equipment was well maintained. Staff were trained in keeping people safe, in the use of specialised equipment such as hoists and in responding to any concern over poor treatment of people. We found the décor to be clean and that people’s rooms were well maintained, warm and comfortable.

There were sufficient numbers of trained staff working in the home at all times and staff were supported by a management team and through regular training, supervision and appraisal. People we spoke with told us that when they needed assistance they did not have to wait a long time to receive it.

Where people lacked the capacity to make decisions for themselves staff had followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff had received relevant training. The manager understood their responsibilities in relation to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and knew how to apply it to people in their care.

There was a relaxed atmosphere in the home and we saw staff interacting with people in a calm, polite and caring manner. Staff supported people as and when required and were aware of the communication needs of each person. There were activities on offer within the service, with a dedicated activities co-ordinator and the involvement of all staff.

People were supported at mealtimes and had choice regarding their preferred meal. Food was nutritious and hot.

The provider had a clear set of values that included the aims and objectives, principles, values of care and the expected outcomes for people who used the service. The service had quality assurance systems in place. These ensured people continued to receive the care, treatment and support they needed.