Please note that the information on this website is now out of date. It is planned that we will update and relaunch, but for now is of historical interest only and we suggest you visit cqc.org.uk
Inspection on 05/11/09 for Goatacre Manor Care Centre
Also see our care home review for Goatacre Manor Care Centre for more information
This inspection was carried out on 5th November 2009.
CQC found this care home to be providing an Poor service.
The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 6 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.
What follows are excerpts from this inspection report. For more information read the full report on the next tab.
What the care home does well
Many improvements have been made at Goatacre Manor since the last inspection. The home has fully revised its processes relating to the assessment of residents` needs and risks. They have also introduced a new individualised care planning system, to which residents, their supporters and staff have ready access. We met with a resident who had been recently admitted. They had had a full assessment of their needs prior to admission. This assessment had been carried out in detail, using an assessment record which provided "triggers" for staff to consider where further assessments were needed and where care plans were indicated. This person`s assessments had been further reviewed on admission and thereafter, when further care needs were identified for them. This person`s records indicated that they were at risk of falls. They had a very clear care plan relating to this, which we noted as good practice included reports of how the person felt about this risk and matters which made them feel apprehensive or supported. They reported to us "staff are always willing and helpful, considerate. Certainly helpful". We met with some very frail residents. All of the frail people we met with had attention to significant details, such as clean fingernails and brushed hair. Where people were not able to assist themselves to eat and drink or change their positions, they had care plans relating to this, to direct staff on how their individual needs were to be met. Care plans were generally revised when a person`s condition changed. Records relating to giving people fluids and meals were generally completed. Where people could not change their positions independently there were some records relating to these changes in positions.Where people were at risk of pressure ulceration, they were provided with relevant equipment to prevent risk and settings required on equipment was generally documented. People who were nutritionally at risk had their weight monitored regularly and were referred to appropriate health care support when needed. Where people were prescribed nutritional supplements, there were clear records that people were being given these supplements. Where people had wounds, there were clear systems for assessing the wound and monitoring its progress. Where relevant wounds were regularly photographed. There was evidence that people were referred to the tissue viability nurse. We met with a member of staff who was responsible for wound care. They reported that the home`s new recordkeeping system supported them. They reported on the good communication between the tissue viability nurses and the home. They reported that if changes in dressing regimes were recommended, that they were always informed and that revised instructions were clearly documented in the residents` records. This person was also aware that having a dressing performed could cause pain for the resident and the importance of making sure that the person had adequate prescribed pain relief before the dressing was to be performed. Where a resident had a urinary catheter, there were clear records relating to the management of the catheter, which conformed to current guidelines. The manager has made many improvements in the home`s handling of medicines since the last inspection. Nurses that we spoke to were very positive about the changes that had been made and felt reassured by the extra checks that had been put into place. The medication administration records are checked daily by senior staff. These were seen to be completed correctly with refusals noted. We looked at care plans that related to these refusals and saw that the details were included along with strategies for helping staff to support the person to take their medicines. We saw evidence of the involvement of health care professionals in people`s care; a new resident was about to see the doctor as staff had concerns about their medicines. A controlled drugs cupboard has been secured to the wall in the approved manner. We observed that all wash bowls in residents` rooms were now named for the person and were stored clean and dry. New commode chairs have been provided to replace old, stained commode chairs. Staff reported on the ready supply of disposable gloves and that different sizes of gloves were available to suit staff with different hand sizes, they were also able to show us supplies of latex-free gloves for people with latex allergy. The provider has purchased three profiling beds and reports that they are planning to gradually increase the numbers of such beds. The home has supplied stools for staff so that they can sit and support residents who needed assistance to drink or eat their meals. Staff were observed using these stools at meal times and tea and coffee rounds, engaging residents in conversation whilst supporting them. We reviewed the home`s training records. We observed that they have introduced a clear training matrix, so that they can see at a glance which members of staff have received mandatory training and who needs to do so. They have also introduced management systems to ensure that staff members are aware of their own responsibilities for attending such mandatory training. The training manager on duty reported on progress towards ensuring all staff were trained in manual handling and infection control. One of the registered nurses reported on how they supervised staff to ensure that safe manual handling and infection control practice was carried out. A resident told us that staff always used the hoist for them when assisting them to move and change their position inbed at night. We observed two carers assisting a person to move from a wheelchair to their armchair in a safe manner, using a hoist. Residents we met with clearly felt able to bring matters up with staff. One person told us "I couldn`t have better. There is always someone about" and "I`m not too fond of ringing the bell, but I did ring this morning to get up". They reported that someone came quickly and that they were supported as they wanted. Another person joked with us that they liked to "keep and eye" on staff, winking at a member of staff as they did so. They reported that there was "always someone around if you need them" and how well they slept when they went to bed.
What the care home could do better:
Goatacre Manor has made significant strides in improving its service, however as with any service where significant improvements were necessary, there remain some areas which need attention. While staff were recording when they gave people drinks and meals and supported residents in changing their positions, they did not do this on every occasion. This particularly related to moving people`s positions where, for example one person`s care plan stated that they needed their position changing every two hours but their daily record did not evidence that this was taking place. While many records were clear and precise, others continued to need improvements. Wording such as "repositioned" does not state how or where a person`s position was changed. Wording in care plans such as "regularly" need revision to describe clearly how often an action needs to be performed. If a person is being given thickening agent to help them to swallow safely, their care plan should state in precise language how thick they need their drinks to be. Where people have complex needs such as the use of a conveen to manage continence issues, as well as stating how often the appliance needs to be changed, care plans need to direct how the appliance is to be put in place, including use of creams and adhesives. Where a person has diabetes, as well as stating the lowest and highest blood sugar levels needed for the person, the care plans should direct staff on actions to take if the person`s blood sugar levels are outside these ranges. Some care plans would benefit from more development. For example, we observed that two people had flexion contractures, however their care plans did not describe how personal care was to be performed in the light of this, to prevent discomfort to the resident. Residents who had bowel care needs did have care plans but these did not reflect what was written in their bowel care record or daily record. Residents who needed to be encouraged to take in adequate fluids did not have the amount of fluids they needed to drink on a daily basis documented. People who had been prescribed medicines to be taken `as required` had protocols to support staff when making the decision to use the medicine. Some of these protocols were not sufficiently detailed, for example one stated `use for anxiety episodes` and another `for seizures`. Clearer guidelines are needed to ensure that people receive consistent care and treatment. The home is not using the lancet devices for taking small blood samples that are recommended by the Medicines and health Care Regulatory Agency (MHRA). Following a safeguarding alert, it was identified that the home were using an un-licenced product to irrigate a person`s wound. This was fully documented in the resident`s notes,however such action is contrary to Nursing and Midwifery Council`s guidelines and if such products are used, they must be used under the supervision of a clinician with responsibility or in the context of a clinical trial. We will be issuing a warning letter to the home relating to this as part of our enforcement procedures. Some of the residents we met with needed to be moved using a hoist. Discussions with staff showed that while the type and size of hoist sling to be used was clearly documented in their records and were being used for the person, that such slings were used communally. This is not regarded as good practice, as due to where slings are placed on a person`s body, communal use of hoist slings can present a risk of cross infection. We observed that generally the home documents the dial setting on air mattresses in care plans. However when we looked at dial settings on the mattresses in use, three of them did not relate to the care plan and one where the setting was not documented in records, did not relate to the person`s weight. Dial settings on air mattresses need to be correct as if a mattress is not correctly set in accordance with the persons` weight, this can increase the person`s risk of pressure ulceration. While the home has developed a training matrix, training relating to other areas is not documented. For example the care assistant who performs dressings reported that they had been trained by the registered nurse who lead in this area but this had not been documented. There was no evidence in records that this carer had had recent external training from the tissue viability nurses. This is needed, so that people who perform wound care can be advised of current good practice in this key area. Whilst training of carers in extended roles such as application of conveens is documented on induction, the home does not maintain records of up-dates in the area or assessments of continued competency.