Karenza Care Home

There were not enough staff to meet people's needs, even with agency staff covering some shifts. Some people told us they were not always able to have a wash every day with staff support. Staff confirmed this.

The service were recruiting to vacant posts at this time. Appropriate processes in place helped ensure safe recruitment.

Nearly half of the people living at Karenza required the support of two staff for all care and support. There were only two care staff planned to work with one nurse on duty at night. Staff told us people did not always have their needs met in a timely manner.

Parts of the Karenza building were in need of attention. One person's room had areas where the plaster had fallen off the wall. The ensuite toilet was in a very poor condition. The main lounge double glazing was in need of replacement and people's view of the grounds was obscured by moisture within the windows. This was reported to the provider.

The provider had effective safeguarding systems in place and staff knew what actions to take to help ensure people were protected from harm or abuse.

People received their prescribed medicines in a safe way. Staff used an electronic medicines management system to record all administrations. Regular medicine audits were taking place.

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.

Staff worked within the principles of the MCA and sought people's consent before providing personal care and assistance. Guidance in care plans guided staff to help build independence wherever possible.

Identified risks were assessed and monitored. Care plans contained guidance and direction for staff on how to meet people's needs and reduce risks.

Care plans were electronic and contained current guidance and direction for staff to meet people's needs. Care plans had been recently reviewed.

The food provided at Karenza was delivered pre-prepared by an external company. People's feedback about the food was mixed. Staff were available to support people with their meals where needed.

The manager had only been in post for a few weeks prior to this inspection. They had already carried out audits and begun to review every care plan personally.

The manager and the provider had oversight of the service. An audit programme was in place to help identify any areas of the service that may require improvement. However, the poor standard of décor in parts of the service had not been addressed in a timely manner.

The manager had contacted people's families by letter to introduce themselves and invite them in to Karenza to meet and seek their views. Staff were being met with to address any immediate issues or identify any improvements needed. Staff confirmed things had begun to change for the better.

The manager understood their responsibilities under the duty of candour. The manager and the staff worked with local health and social care professionals to meet people's needs.