York House Care Home

Updated 11 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by an inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

York House Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 18 people who used the service and five visitors about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 12 members of staff including care workers, senior care workers, domestic and catering staff and the registered manager. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of records. These included three people’s care records, multiple medication records, and two staff files in relation to recruitment. We also reviewed a variety of records relating to the management of the service, such as staff supervision records, accident and incident records, maintenance records and quality assurance records.

After the inspection

We received feedback about the service from the local authority quality monitoring team.

Updated 11 September 2019

About the service

York House Care Home is a residential care home providing personal care to people aged 65 and over. The service can support up to 34 people in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection, there were 27 people living there or having a respite break.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People, visitors and staff had confidence in the management team. The registered manager addressed any issues robustly. However, the service’s quality assurance system had not flagged up matters we found. These included not notifying CQC of a serious injury and the last inspection rating not displayed correctly on the provider’s website. Issues were promptly rectified once drawn to the registered manager’s attention. We have made a recommendation about management oversight and quality assurance processes.

People and visitors gave positive feedback about their or their loved one’s life at the service. People’s needs were assessed before they arrived at the service to be sure it was suitable for them. Meals were appetising, and dietary needs and preferences were met. Staff were prompt to contact health professionals when there were concerns about people’s health. There were adaptations for people with mobility difficulties. Staff were supported through training and supervision to perform their roles effectively.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We have made recommendations regarding recording of mental capacity assessments and best interests decisions, and the system for monitoring the expiry dates and conditions on Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations.

People had care from staff who knew about and respected their individual needs and preferences. Care plans reflected people’s individual needs and were up to date. Staff were aware of people’s communication needs and provided the support they needed with these. There were organised activities for people who wanted these. Staff liaised with health professionals to ensure people were in comfort as the end of their life approached. People and visitors said they would feel able to raise a complaint with the management team. We have made a recommendation in relation to the complaints policy.

People told us staff were kind and helpful. Staff were respectful towards people and upheld their dignity and independence. People and, where appropriate, relatives felt involved in decisions about their or their loved one’s care. People said they could have visitors whenever it suited them.

People told us they felt safe and comfortable with the staff who supported them. There were enough staff on duty to provide the care people needed. Staff only started work for the service once recruitment checks were completed. They had training in safeguarding adults and knew how to report suspected abuse. Risks for people were assessed and managed, in consultation with them. The management team reviewed accident and incident forms to ensure all necessary action had been taken for people’s safety and wellbeing. Learning from accidents and incidents was shared through team meetings or staff supervision meetings, as appropriate. Medicines were stored securely and managed safely. The premises were kept clean and tidy.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 14 October 2016).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.