Archived: The Elizabeth Frankland Moore Blesma Home Blackpool

Updated 24 December 2015

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 inspection took place on 03 November 2015 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector and a specialist advisor. The specialist advisor for the inspection at the Elizabeth Frankland Moore Blesma Home Blackpool had experience of services who supported older people.

Before our inspection on 03 November 2015 we reviewed the information we held on the service. This included notifications we had received from the provider, about incidents that affect the health, safety and welfare of people who lived at the home and previous inspection reports. We also checked to see if any information concerning the care and welfare of people living at the home had been received.

We reviewed the Provider Information Record (PIR) we received prior to our inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. This provided us with information and numerical data about the operation of the home. We used this information as part of the evidence for the inspection. This guided us to what areas we would focus on as part of our inspection.

We spoke with a range of people about the service. They included the registered manager, nine members of staff and six people who lived at the home. We also spoke to the commissioning department at the local authority and the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). This helped us to gain a balanced overview of what people experienced accessing the service.

We looked at the care records of four people, recruitment records of two recently employed staff members, the duty rota, training matrix, menu’s, records relating to the management of the home and the medication records of five people. We also undertook a tour of the building to ensure it was clean, hygienic and a safe place for people to live.

Updated 24 December 2015

This inspection visit took place on 03 November 2015 and was unannounced.

When we last inspected the service on 12 May 2014 we found breaches of legal requirements relating to the safety, availability and suitability of equipment. This was because we identified the homes electrical appliances had not been checked to ensure they were safe and fit for purpose. This was potentially putting people at risk of harm.

The provider responded by sending the Care Quality Commission (CQC) an action plan of how they had addressed the findings from the inspection. We found the action plan had addressed the areas of non- compliance identified. The provider also sent us a test certificate confirming the homes electrical appliances were in a safe working condition.

We found the improvements the provider made had been maintained during this inspection.

The Elizabeth Frankland Moore Blesma Home Blackpool is owned by the British Limbless Ex-Servicemen's Association. The home is registered to accommodate 49 people and specialises in supporting people with a physical disability. The home is situated in the South Shore area of Blackpool and is close to local amenities. At the time of our inspection visit there were 21 people who lived there.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 registered manager had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report any unsafe care or abusive practices. People we spoke with told us they felt safe and their rights and dignity were respected.

We found recruitment procedures were safe with appropriate checks undertaken before new staff members commenced their employment. Staff spoken with and records seen confirmed they had received induction training when they commenced working at the home. One staff member said, “I hadn’t worked in care for some time when I applied to work here. I found my training covered everything I needed to be able to work with confidence.”

Staff had received training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs.

We looked at how the service was staffed. We found sufficient nursing and care staff levels were in place to provide support people required. We saw the deployment of staff throughout the day was organised. We saw staff were available to support people when needed and call bells were answered quickly. One person we spoke with said, “I am receiving the care I want when I need it. I have no concerns about the staff being available when I want them.”

Care plans we looked at confirmed the registered manager had completed an assessment of people’s support needs before they moved into the home. We saw people or a family member had been involved in the assessment and had consented to the support being provided. People we spoke with said they were happy with their care and they liked living at the home.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care being provided.

People were happy with the variety and choice of meals available to them. Regular snacks and drinks were provided between meals to ensure people received adequate nutrition and hydration. We saw fresh fruit was available in the lounge for people who wanted this. The cook had information about people’s dietary needs and these were being met.

The environment was well maintained, clean and hygienic when we visited. No offensive odours were observed by any members of the inspection team. People who lived at the home said they were happy with the standard of hygiene in place. One person we spoke with said, “The place is spotless and always smells fresh. It was the first thing I noticed when I came to look around the home before I decided to move in. My room is lovely and clean.”

Equipment used by staff to support people had been maintained and serviced to ensure they were safe for use. The service had recently purchased a new hoist to assist staff mobilising people who required help. All staff had received training to ensure they could support people with the hoist safely.

We found medication procedures in place were safe. Staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medicines were safely kept and appropriate arrangements for storing were in place. People told us they received their medicines at the times they needed them.

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions.

People told us they were happy with the activities arranged to keep them entertained. These were arranged both individually and in groups.

The service had a complaints procedure which was made available to people on their admission to the home. People we spoke with told us they were comfortable with complaining to staff or management when necessary.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included staff and resident meetings and care reviews. We found people were satisfied with the service they were receiving.