Archived: Field House Rest Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

The people who lived in the home told us they were pleased with the care provided. They said that their views were respected and listened to.

We saw that there were enough staff to attend to people’s needs.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications had needed to be submitted proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they were happy with the care they received. They told us that the registered manager and the staff had asked them what their needs were and how they would like them met. One person said, “They ask you what you want”.

Care records confirmed people’s needs and preferences had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with their wishes.

People said they were happy to discuss their personal problems and preferences with staff. They said that staff obtained help for them if they were ill. This meant people were supported to keep in good health, had access to health care services and received ongoing support.

We found that the generally staff received the support and training that enabled them to meet the needs of the people living in the home At the time of our visit the provider was part way through ensuring all of the staff team had received necessary training.

Is the service caring?

People we talked with told us their choices and wishes were respected and they were able to live their lives as they wished. Staff took the time to find out about people’s background. Staff knew people’s needs well and how they wished to be cared for. This meant that staff cared about the person as an individual and were concerned about their well-being.

People that we talked with told us that they found the registered manager and the staff easy to approach about any issues they had. This meant that people were listened to and they felt that their views mattered.

Is the service responsive?

People had been assessed before they moved into the home so that arrangements could be made to meet their needs.

People told us they talked with the registered manager and the staff about what was important to them. They talked the about activities they took part in and their meals. They told us that their care packages had been changed as a result.

Is the service well led?

The management and staff treated people with compassion, dignity and respect. Staff we talked with showed they understood those values as they discussed their role and responsibilities in their work. This meant the service promoted an open culture that was centred on the individual and empowered them to take control of their life as much as they were able.

At this inspection we found that progress had been made in the storage and checking systems for people’s boxed medicines. This meant that where we had previously had concerns we found that improvements had been made.

We saw that there were systems in place that checked people’s boxed medicines to ensure people always received these at the right time as prescribed. This made sure people's health needs were effectively met.

Staff knew how to support people to meet their needs and referred people to other health professionals. Staff followed advice from other professionals to ensure people's health and well being. A relative told us that staff always let them know about any appointments and how their relation was.

We found that improvements needed to be made to the management of people’s boxed medicines as some records were not always accurate. Therefore we could not tell whether people were always receiving these types of medicines as prescribed to meet their health needs.

There were no unpleasant smells in the home. Improvements had been made since our last inspection as we saw equipment was clean for people to use and staff had received training to meet people's needs.

During this inspection we found that people's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. We also saw that the manager was developing the arrangements in place for monitoring the quality of the service to ensure improvements were made and sustained for the benefit of people who lived at the home.

Visitors to Field House told us that they were happy with the care and support that their relation received. People visiting told us that they found Field House to be, “Very Homely” with, “Very nice staff”.

Throughout the inspection we saw examples of staff caring and supporting people when they needed assistance.

While we were having a look around the home we found that appropriate standards of cleanliness were not always being maintained. Some equipment was found to be unclean and not suitable for people to use.

We saw that the management of medication needed to be improved. Medication was not always secure and records were not always accurate.

We spoke with staff and found that they were knowledgeable about different types of abuse and their responsibilities to report any suspicions or allegations of abuse. Staff were not able to tell us when they had received training in some areas. The records showed that some staff had not received training while others had not received refresher training.

Effective systems were not in place to assess and monitor the quality of care provided for people and as a means to identify where improvements were needed.