Royal Cambridge Home

Updated 20 November 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

Three inspectors carried out the inspection.

Service and service type

The Royal Cambridge Home 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 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.

Before the inspection

We used the information the registered manager 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 reviewed the evidence we had about the service. This included any notifications of significant events, such as serious injuries or safeguarding referrals. Notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

During the inspection

We spoke with seven people who lived at the home and two visiting relatives. We spoke with eight staff including the registered manager, the deputy manager, the chef, care staff and housekeeping staff.

We looked at care records for four people, including their assessments, care plans and risk assessments. We read minutes of staff meetings, residents’ meetings and the results of surveys. We checked four staff files, medicines management and recording, accident and incident records, quality monitoring checks and audits.

After the inspection

The registered manager sent us further information including the minutes of residents’ and staff meetings. We spoke with a relative and a healthcare professional by telephone to hear their feedback about the home.

Updated 20 November 2019

The Royal Cambridge Home is a care home without nursing for a maximum of 30 older people, including people living with dementia. There were 20 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

The provider had submitted plans to redevelop the service. A decision on the planning application had yet to be made at the time of our inspection. Because of the planned redevelopment, the home was not making permanent admissions at the time of our visit.

People’s experience of using this service:

People received their care from consistent staff who knew their needs, interests and preferences about their support. Staff were kind and caring and treated people with respect. Relatives said the home had a ‘family feel’ that their family members enjoyed. People and their relatives were involved in planning their care. Staff encouraged people to make choices and respected their decisions.

We found that care records were not always complete or up-to-date. This had not adversely impacted people’s care as staff provided the support they needed. However, there was a risk that people could receive inappropriate care as their care plans did not always accurately reflect their needs. We have made a recommendation about this.

People were supported to maintain good health and to obtain medical treatment when they needed it. Staff were observant of any changes in people’s health and ensured any concerns were investigated. Managers and staff had established effective working relationships with other professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. Staff kept relatives well-informed and up-to-date about their family members’ health and well-being.

People had access to a range of activities, events and outings. Staff supported people to remain involved in the community and to use local shops and cafes. People’s religious and spiritual needs were known and respected. Relatives were made welcome when they visited and were encouraged to be involved in the life of the home. People enjoyed the food at the home and were consulted about the menu. Any specific dietary needs were recorded and known by catering staff.

The management team provided good support to staff and communicated effectively with people, relatives and professionals. People, families and staff were encouraged to give their views about the home at regular meetings and through surveys. Any suggestions people made were listened to and acted upon. People and relatives knew how to complain and told us they would feel confident in doing so.

Staff received the training they needed for their roles and shared information effectively to ensure people received consistent care. Staff understood their role in safeguarding people and knew how to recognise and respond to abuse. There were enough staff on each shift to meet people’s needs, although following an incident that we observed during the inspection, the registered manager agreed to review how staff were deployed to meet people’s needs.

Risks were assessed and managed effectively. Medicines were managed safely. Staff maintained appropriate standards of hygiene and infection control. The provider had a business continuity plan to ensure people would continue to receive their care in the event of an emergency. The provider operated robust recruitment procedures which helped ensure that only suitable staff were employed.

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.

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

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was Good (published 9 December 2016). Since this rating was awarded, the provider has altered its legal entity. We have used the previous rating to inform our planning and decisions about the rating at this inspection.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence 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.