Nightingale Nursing Home

We found the following examples of good practice:

The service had provided staff with training in infection and prevention control which included individual sessions on donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE). This was reinforced with ad-hoc spot checks and included in staff supervision sessions that took place regularly.

The service had reviewed its staffing requirements early on in the COVID-19 pandemic and proactively secured sufficient staff to cover predicted additional work pressures. This meant people benefitted from continuity of care.

The provider met the requirements around regular testing for COVID-19 for both, staff and people living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

We spent time with people during our visits and feedback received from people living in the service was positive. Staff demonstrated empathy and cared for people they supported. People said that the service was of a good standard. People were cared for by kind staff who ensured that people received the care they needed and wanted. People told us that the staff were, “Nice people” and, “Very kind”.

The management and staff created a warm and relaxed environment and we observed a caring relationship between people and all grades of staff. The service was safe, with systems and processes which ensured that any concerns were reported to appropriate authorities without delay. There were quality assurance systems in place to help monitor the quality of the service and identify any areas which might require improvement. The manager listened to feedback and reflected on how the service could be further improved.

The service was well led. The manager was committed to developing a service where people received person-centred care. This was evident throughout our visit.

Rating at last inspection:

At our last inspection in December 2016 (Report published on 24 January 2017) we rated the service good.

Why we inspected:

We completed a planned inspection based on the previous rating of Good.

Follow up:

We will review the service in line with our methodology for Good services.

Nightingale Nursing Home provides care and nursing care for up to 35 older residents, including those living with dementia. The home is located in Littlehampton, close to local amenities and the seafront. At the time of our visit there were 20 people living at the home, one of whom was on a respite stay. The home has two communal lounges, a fully assisted bathroom on each floor and an accessible garden.

The service has 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.

People felt safe at the home. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and reviewed. Staff understood local safeguarding procedures. They explained the action they would take if they were concerned that someone was at risk of abuse. People received their medicines safely.

People had developed good relationships with staff and had confidence in their skills and abilities. They told us that staff were kind and that they treated them respectfully. There was an established team of staff at the home, which offered continuity of care for people. The registered manager ensured that there were sufficient staff on duty at all times to meet people’s needs. Staff had received training and were supported by the management through supervision and appraisal.

People were involved in planning their care and in making suggestions on how the service was run. Staff understood how people’s capacity should be considered and had taken steps to ensure that people’s rights were protected in line with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People enjoyed home-cooked food and were able to make suggestions for dishes they would enjoy. Staff monitored people’s food and fluid intake to ensure that they were receiving enough. Where concerns were identified, action had been taken.

Care plans provided detailed information about people and guidance for staff on how to support them. Staff responded quickly to changes in people’s needs and adapted care and support to suit them. Where appropriate, referrals were made to healthcare professionals, such as the GP or community psychiatric nurse (CPN), and their advice was followed.

There was strong leadership within the home. The registered manager and deputy monitored the delivery of care and had a system to check and review the quality of the service. There was also a plan in place setting out future improvements to the home, including increasing activity provision, additional support for families and changes to the physical environment. Suggestions on improvements to the service were welcomed and people’s feedback encouraged.

We found that people were receiving the appropriate level of care and treatment as agreed in their care plan. People we spoke with confirmed that they were well looked after by the team of staff and that their care needs were met. Visitors we met told us that they were satisfied about the level of care and treatment their family were receiving from the service. For example people said: 'since mum had been here she is looking a lot better', 'we have nothing but praise for the staff who work very hard and always welcoming', 'my wife is well looked after and they do everything they can to help her', 'matron and the girls are a great bunch' and 'we are always kept informed about dad's health'.

We spoke with staff and found that they had the relevant training and support to enable them to carry on with their role effectively. We noted that staffs adhered to the regime of cleanliness and infection control within the home to ensure people were protected. We found that the home had an effective complaint procedure in place and people had access to it.

We made observations throughout the visit and saw people being offered choices as to what they wanted to eat or what activities they wanted to take part in during the day. We saw people being addressed in a respectful manner. One person told us "they even got me kippers for my supper."

We looked at peoples individual care plans and saw that the information recorded enabled staff to plan and deliver the required level of care and support on an individual basis.

We saw that regular audits of the service were completed by the provider ensuring that people who used the service benefit from a service that monitors the quality of care that people received.

Staff told us that they had received regular training and that they felt that they were supported to carry out their roles and meet the needs of people who used the service.

People said that they had no complaints about the service and that if they did they would speak to the staff or the manager