Darland House

Updated 26 February 2021

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.

The service had been identified for use by the Local Authority as a designated setting in response to the Winter Plan for people discharged from hospital with a positive Covid-19 status. This inspection was to see if the service was compliant with infection control and prevention measures and met the criteria for a designated setting.

This inspection took place on 21 January 2021 and was announced.

Updated 26 February 2021

This inspection took place on 9 May 2018 and was unannounced.

Darland House is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as 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 is part of the health services provided by Medway Community Healthcare (MCH) and is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 40 people who are living with advanced dementia. The accommodation was provided across four units, over two floors. A lift was available to take people between floors. There were 39 people living in the service at the time of the inspection.

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 was supported in the day to day management of the service by a head of service and a clinical lead.

People told us they felt safe. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people's needs in a timely and unhurried manner.

People's medicines were managed and administered in a safe way by staff who had been trained to carry out the task.

People were protected from the risk of harm or abuse because the provider had effective systems in place which were understood and followed by staff. People were protected from the risk of the spread of infection.

People continued to receive effective care. People were supported by staff who were trained and competent in their roles.

The provider was working within the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). The registered manager and staff demonstrated they understood the principles of the Act. Staff had received MCA training and sought people's consent before providing assistance.

People's health care needs were monitored and met. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who took time to get to know people and what was

important to them. Staff treated people with respect and respected their right to privacy.

People were involved in planning and reviewing the care they received which helped to ensure people received a service which met their needs and preferences.

There were daily activities for people which they could choose to join in with. However, not everyone was engaged in activities during our inspection. We made a recommendation about this.

Complaints were taken seriously and responded to. People's religious and cultural needs were understood and met by staff.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. People and their families had opportunities to put forward their ideas and suggestions to improve the service they received.