Aster Grove Nursing Home

The overall rating for this key question is good. People were protected from the risk of abuse, staff understood how and who to report concerns to internally and externally of the service.

People and their relatives were involved with planning their care and support, including managing risks. Staff were provided with up to date guidance to support people.

There were enough trained and skilled staff deployed to support people, staff were recruited safely and regularly supervised. Staff received training relevant to their role and were able to request further training for ongoing development.

Medicines were stored and managed safely, people received their medicines at the right time and in line with current guidance.

Staff and management learned from audits, adverse events and near misses. Incidents were responded to appropriately and lessons were learned to avoid reoccurrence.

People were protected by staff who followed infection prevention and control measures. The service was clean and staff followed policy in respect of personal protective equipment.

The overall rating for this key question is good. People’s needs were assessed prior to them living at the service. Staff used nationally recognised tools to identify risks and planned care and support to address and mitigate the risks.

People experienced good outcomes of care by receiving joined up care from staff and health and social care professionals. Professional advice was included and updated in people care records; staff followed the advice, monitored the effectiveness, and provided feedback with to professionals.

Staff worked in line with the 5 principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were asked consent for all support interactions. People and/or their legal representatives were asked to read and sign consent forms to enable staff to offer support. Staff respected people’s wishes and right to decline care.

The overall rating for this key question is good. People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them well.

Staff protected people’s dignity and afforded them the privacy they deserved. Staff received training in dignity and respect and practiced what they had learned. For example, staff spoke with people discreetly when needed.

People were able to retain as much autonomy as possible; staff offered people choices and respected their decisions.

Workforce well-being was important to the management team, staff were respected and were supported to integrate into the service and community.

The overall rating for this key question is good. People and their relatives were involved in care planning which promoted person-centred care, staff followed people’s wishes and got to know them as individuals.

People received continuity of care as the management team ensured health and social care professionals remained actively involved in their care. When people required different support settings, the management team ensured a full handover of people’s needs were provided.

People were provided information in a format and way they understood. People’s communication needs were considered, for example, pictorial aids and assertive technology was utilised to support people to understand information and make decisions.

People were listened to and were involved in their care and the running of the service. Care reviews involved people and/or their relatives, meetings were held so people were kept informed and give their views, a suggestion box was in place for people to comment and remain anonymous should they choose.

People were supported to overcome barriers to health and social care. Staff and management advocated for people who were at risk of inequalities in care. Provisions were made to ensure people had access to care and support services and access to the community to lead a full life.

Staff had undergone training to support their understanding of end of life care. People and/or their relatives contributed to future care planning so staff were aware of people’s end of life wishes. Staff knew how to access professional involvement for people who were at the end of their lives and ensure they had the right equipment and medicine to promote comfort and dignity.

The overall rating for this key question is good, however, we identified the registered manager had not always notified CQC of important events within the service. This was a breach of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009: Regulation 18.

The registered manager had not submitted statutory notifications for allegations of abuse, during the assessment the registered manager was open and transparent about safeguarding investigations and outcomes, submitted all notifications in retrospect during our assessment.

Most quality assurance systems highlighted areas of improvement. Shortfalls were identified, addressed and monitored. Staff championed areas of the service and monitored and provided advice to their colleagues, any areas of concerns were fed-back to the registered manager.

Managers and staff created a culture to support the delivery of high-quality care. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team, who had all worked at the service since the opening.

There was a capable and compassionate management team who promoted an open culture to deliver good quality care for people in partnership with external professionals.

People, family members and external health and social care professionals told us they felt the service was managed well. The provider sought views of people, their relatives and staff who provided feedback about the service through suggestion boxes, quality survey questionnaires and meetings. Feedback was listened to and addressed.

Staff were enabled to speak up; the management team provided advice and reassurance; staff had the contact details of all managers including the nominated individual. If staff felt unable to speak up within the service, they had access to a whistle-blowing line.

Staff equality and diversity was respected. Staff with protected characteristics were supported to continue their roles with reasonable adjustments made.