Background to this inspection
Updated
16 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 was planned to check 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 29 September 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of three adult social care inspectors, a specialist advisor in dementia, and an expert-by-experience with knowledge of dementia care. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
At the time of our inspection there were 42 people living at the home. During our visit we spoke with twelve people who lived at Sabourn Court, four relatives, nine members of staff and the registered manager. We looked around some areas of the home including bedrooms, bathrooms and communal areas. We observed how care and support was provided to people throughout the inspection and we observed lunch in the dining room of Oakwood House. We looked at documents and records related to people’s care, and the management of the home such as staff recruitment and training records and quality audits. We looked at six people’s care plans and six medication records.
Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the home. This included notifications from the provider and members of the public. We contacted the local authority and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion which gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.
At the time of this inspection the service had a registered manager. Although this person had been seconded to work at another home for the provider they were present during our inspection. The acting manager was on annual leave and not available during this inspection.
Updated
16 December 2015
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 29 September 2015. Our last inspection took place on 4 April 2013 and found that the provider was compliant in all but one standard which was infection control. We carried out a focused inspection on 5 September 2013 specifically to look at infection control and found that the provider met this standard.
Sabourn Court provides accommodation and nursing care for up to 49 older people. The home is comprised of two buildings, namely Oakwood House and Park House. It is located close to local amenities and is accessible by public transport.
At the time of this inspection the home had 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 who we spoke with felt safe using this service. Staff had received training in safeguarding and were able to demonstrate their knowledge in this area.
People’s care plans contained sufficient and relevant information to provide consistent, person centred care and support. We found people had access to healthcare services and these were accessed in a timely way to make sure people’s health care needs were met. The medication system was well managed and people received their medicines at the right times.
Recruitment processes were not always robust as thorough checks were not always completed before staff started work to make sure they were safe and suitable to work.
The provider did not have a way of assessing overall staffing levels for the service. Both people using the service and staff members told us there were insufficient numbers of staff whilst building works were taking place.
Staff were able to demonstrate an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, although some mental capacity assessments had not been fully completed.
On the day of our visit we saw people looked well cared for. We saw staff speaking calmly and respectfully to people who used the service. Staff demonstrated they knew people’s individual preferences and what they needed to do to meet people’s care needs. Staff demonstrated they respected people’s privacy and dignity.
We saw people received adequate nutrition and hydration. They had access to a wide variety of meal choices, although people had different experiences regarding the quality of food.
Complaints were not responded to in accordance with the provider’s policy and the results from the last survey for people living in the home had not been analysed by the provider. We saw there was support from the provider who carried out regular audits.