Inspection Report We are the regulator: Our job is to check whether hospitals, care homes and care services are meeting essential standards. Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital Whitepost Hill, Redhill, RH1 6YY Date of Inspection: 01 August 2013 Date of Publication: October 2013 We inspected the following standards as part of a routine inspection. This is what we found: Respecting and involving people who use services Care and welfare of people who use services Safeguarding people who use services from abuse Management of medicines Supporting workers Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 1
Details about this location Registered Provider Registered Manager Overview of the service Type of service Regulated activities The Whitepost Health Care Group Mr. Joseph Nkonde Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital has been registered by The Care Quality Commission to provide hospital care for people detained under The Mental Health Act 1983, and for people who are admitted informally. There are four units providing accommodation for up to 49 people. There is also a cottage that provided rehabilitation facilities for people preparing for independence. Hospital services for people with mental health needs, learning disabilities and problems with substance misuse Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 Diagnostic and screening procedures Treatment of disease, disorder or injury Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 2
Contents When you read this report, you may find it useful to read the sections towards the back called 'About CQC inspections' and 'How we define our judgements'. Summary of this inspection: Page Why we carried out this inspection 4 How we carried out this inspection 4 What people told us and what we found 4 More information about the provider 5 Our judgements for each standard inspected: Respecting and involving people who use services 6 Care and welfare of people who use services 8 Safeguarding people who use services from abuse 9 Management of medicines 10 Supporting workers 12 Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision 13 About CQC Inspections 14 How we define our judgements 15 Glossary of terms we use in this report 17 Contact us 19 Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 3
Summary of this inspection Why we carried out this inspection This was a routine inspection to check that essential standards of quality and safety referred to on the front page were being met. We sometimes describe this as a scheduled inspection. This was an unannounced inspection. How we carried out this inspection We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 1 August 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service and talked with staff. What people told us and what we found People told us that they were kept informed regarding their care and treatment and that they were able to attend daily meetings to discuss their daily activities. One patient told us "the hospital is satisfactory considering my circumstances". Another patient told us "It is a terrible place to be". Two patients told us that they were making good progress and this was because the staff cared and gave them encouragement and support. We saw that patients had care plans and were they were given copies of their plan. One patient told us that they did not wish to have a care plan as this was meaningless and a waste of time. We had good comments regarding the food and were told that there was choice and variety. Some patients told us they participated in cooking activities that was part of their rehabilitation programme toward community living again. Patients told us they knew their rights and they felt safe. They told us they were able to talk to their allocated nurse or any member of staff if they had a problem or concerns. Staff told us they had undertaken their safeguarding training and they would not hesitate to report any concerns or issues to their line manager. We saw that the hospital was clean and cleaning schedules were in place that ensured communal areas, bathrooms and toilets were cleaned daily. Staff felt they had the appropriate training to undertake their roles and responsibilities. You can see our judgements on the front page of this report. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 4
More information about the provider Please see our website www.cqc.org.uk for more information, including our most recent judgements against the essential standards. You can contact us using the telephone number on the back of the report if you have additional questions. There is a glossary at the back of this report which has definitions for words and phrases we use in the report. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 5
Our judgements for each standard inspected Respecting and involving people who use services People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People's views were taken into account in the way service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. Reasons for our judgement Patients who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. We spoke to several patients during our visit on various units and they told us that they were aware of the treatment they had. We spoke with three patients on Mulberry Unit who had been detained under the Mental Health Act and they knew the reason why they were detained. The five patients we spoke to on Aspen Unit, and three patients on Lavender Unit also knew why they were being detained under the Mental Health Act. We also met and spoke briefly to more patients who were being treated on an informal basis. Patients were given information regarding the hospital in the form of a welcome pack. This contained all the information about the hospital and the services available to them. Patients were also kept informed of hospital activities and events through the "Shrewsbury Times" which is an internal publication for patients information. They were also welcome to contribute articles for this newsletter. Several notice boards contained information for example menus, meal times, Clinical Team Meetings and health support groups. Patients expressed their views and were able to make decisions about their care and treatment. We saw that patients attended a meeting every morning supported by the occupational therapy team and care staff. This enabled them to plan their day and to set goals and objectives. For example some patients planned unescorted leave to the local town and other patients planned escorted leave. We saw two patients planned for their cooking project and went to Redhill town for their shopping. They returned later with shopping for several meals. Staff were supporting a patient to budget and to manage their money and cash card. Patients told us that they had the choice to participate in organised activities. Art groups, literacy groups, cooking groups, and computer skills are some of the activities offered. As part of patient's rehabilitation treatment community participation sachems such as retail work or gardening were an option. Three patients attend a rehabilitation day centre "Stepping Stone" to support them for their return to community living. Patients privacy and dignity was observed to be respected. We saw staff interacted with patients in a kind and respectful manner. Patients told us that staff were kind and caring Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 6
and treated them like "human beings". They told us that they supported them when they were having "a down day". We saw staff knocked on patient's doors before entering. Patients accommodation was provided in single rooms most of which had en suite facilities. Bedrooms were personalised to reflect patient's individuality but this depended on wellbeing. We saw that CCTV cameras were in operation in the communal areas and hallways of the hospital, but not in patients private accommodation. Private space is provided for patients to have meetings and interviews. We were able to use a private room to talk with patients, and were also able to talk privately to a patient in the garden. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 7
Care and welfare of people who use services People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People experienced care, treatment, and support that met their needs and supported their rights. Reasons for our judgement Patient's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans. Care plans at Shrewsbury Court Hospital were maintained electronically. We looked at five care plans on Aspen Unit, and two care plans on Mulberry Unit. The charge nurse provided us with access to these care plans. We saw that care plans were based on good needs assessments, and good multidisciplinary input. Some patients told us they were fully aware of their care plans and were able to discuss their care and treatment with their primary nurse and at ward rounds. One patient told us they were not interested in discussing their care plan, as they felt it was not worth it, as "It is terrible here". Patients were provided with a copy of their care plan. We saw that daily records were maintained of patients care and wellbeing. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured patient's safety and welfare. We saw that risks were identified and risk assessments were in place. For example if a patient was on observation the time and frequency of observation was outlined in a detailed care plan to ensure their safety and welfare. Leave 17 forms were included in care plans. These outlined the leave detained patients were entitled to. They were update when leave entitlement changed and a new form issued. We spoke to one of four psychiatrists who were employed in the hospital. They had responsibility for the mental health needs of all the patients in the hospital and told us they saw patients daily if necessary. All patients are registered with a local GP. There was also a practice nurse employed to work in the hospital to lease with the GP and undertake clinical procedures. For example, taking blood for various tests, monitoring blood pressure, undertaking dressings, administrating flu vaccines, monitoring diabetic patients, undertaking medical checks, providing support for people with their nutrition and providing support for patients who want to stop smoking. Patients told us that they were well supported by the medical team and psychiatrists in the hospital Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 8
Safeguarding people who use services from abuse People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Reasons for our judgement People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. We saw the service had adult protection policies and procedures known as safeguarding in place. These demonstrated how the provider identified potential abuse and prevented abuse from happening for the patients using the hospital. We saw that the hospital had the most recent copy of Surrey County Council's Multi Agency Safeguarding procedures in place. This meant that staff had access to up to date guidance and information to assist them should they need to raise a safeguarding concern. We were told the social worker employed by the hospital was the identified person that coordinated safeguarding matters. This included reporting and making referrals to the local authority, and arranging staff training and updates. We spoke to staff who were able to demonstrate to us their knowledge of the safeguarding procedure and told us that they received training every year regarding adult protection. They also said that they would know what action to take if they suspected an incident of abuse had taken place. Staff had also undertaken training in other related policies for example whistle blowing, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) to further protect patients who used the hospital. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 9
Management of medicines People should be given the medicines they need when they need them, and in a safe way Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. Reasons for our judgement Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to the administration of medication. We saw the hospital had a policy in place for the administration of medication. We observed the registered nurse undertaking the administration of the midday medication on Aspen Ward. This was undertaken in accordance with the hospital's medication procedures and The Nursing and Midwifery Council's (NMC) Code of Professional Conduct. Patients were administered their medication from the nursing office where the medication trolley was located. Staff ensured patients took their medication and did not conceal this for abuse later. We saw that medication was kept safely. All medicine is stored either in the treatment room, or in individual ward trolleys which are kept locked. There was a fridge available for medication that required to be refrigerated. Fridge temperatures were recorded regularly. We saw that the hospital had facilities to manage the use of controlled safely and according to procedure. Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to the recording of medicine. Patients had been given T2 Regulation 27(2) Certificate of Consent to Treatment forms to sign which were included in their care plan. We looked at the medication administration recording charts (MAR charts). These were well maintained and no unexplained gaps in signature were noted. There was also an approved list of authorised registered nurses identified to undertake medication administration in the hospital. Patients we spoke to told us they had consented to take their medication and said that both the medical team and the nurses explained their medication to them and the expected outcomes. We saw on patient having their blood pressure monitored and pulse recorded as a precaution because they had changed their medication and there were known side effects. Medication was supplied by a local chemist who also provided training for staff to ensure safety and awareness. The pharmacist also undertook monitoring audits of medication. Records were also maintained of medicine entering and leaving the home. The GP regularly reviewed patients medication with the practice and updated treatment Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 10
and prescriptions as necessary. Psychiatric medication is reviewed frequently by the team of psychiatrists employed by the hospital. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 11
Supporting workers Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. people were supported by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. Reasons for our judgement Staff received appropriate professional development. We spoke with staff working in the hospital and they confirmed that they received induction training when they commenced employment. We were told that five new members of staff had been recently recruited and they all followed the same induction programme. This included an introduction to organisational policies and procedures, shadowing a senior staff member, observation various procedures, practical training for example record keeping and observation. All staff undertaking induction follow a programme based on the Skills for Care Common Induction Standards. We saw that staff were assessed as competent before they undertook a task unsupervised. Staff told us they felt they had the training and support which enabled them to undertake their roles. We saw that mandatory training was in place which included fire safety, infection control, health and safety, manual handling, care of substances hazardous to health, (COSHH), and food hygiene. Training was provided in house and by external organisations. Staff had recently attended first aid training undertaken by South Coast Ambulance Trust. We were told some staff completed a three day course in management of challenging behaviour and aggression, de-escalation skills, and physical intervention two weeks prior to our visit. We looked at the staff training files in the Human Resource Department and were also shown the training plan for the current year with dates training had been undertaken and the dates that were planned for further update. We were told staff received regular supervision where staff would be able to raise any issues or concerns. Records were maintained that confirmed this. Annual performance appraisals were also in place. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 12
Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. The provider had effective systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service that people receive. Reasons for our judgement Patients at Shrewsbury Court Hospital were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. We saw the hospital had systems in place to monitor the quality of service provision. We were told us that patients attend daily monitoring meetings facilitated by the occupational therapy department and care staff. Patients can plan their daily activities during these meetings which would include planning escorted or unescorted leave. These meetings provided opportunity for staff to identify any issues or anxieties patients may have and resolve any problems immediately. On-going audits of care plans, risk assessments, medication audits, housekeeping audits, catering surveys, and quality monitoring meetings were all in place to measure the quality of service provision. Clinical Team Meetings were undertaken and care plan reviews were undertaken at least monthly or more frequent if necessary. We saw monthly health and safety audits were undertaken that promoted people's welfare and maintained a safe working environment. We saw there was a suggestion and comments were acted upon. We did not look are customer satisfaction quality assurance questionnaires at this inspection. There was a complaints procedure available to all patients and they knew how to make a complaint. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 13
About CQC inspections We are the regulator of health and social care in England. All providers of regulated health and social care services have a legal responsibility to make sure they are meeting essential standards of quality and safety. These are the standards everyone should be able to expect when they receive care. The essential standards are described in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 and the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. We regulate against these standards, which we sometimes describe as "government standards". We carry out unannounced inspections of all care homes, acute hospitals and domiciliary care services in England at least once a year to judge whether or not the essential standards are being met. We carry out inspections of other services less often. All of our inspections are unannounced unless there is a good reason to let the provider know we are coming. There are 16 essential standards that relate most directly to the quality and safety of care and these are grouped into five key areas. When we inspect we could check all or part of any of the 16 standards at any time depending on the individual circumstances of the service. Because of this we often check different standards at different times. When we inspect, we always visit and we do things like observe how people are cared for, and we talk to people who use the service, to their carers and to staff. We also review information we have gathered about the provider, check the service's records and check whether the right systems and processes are in place. We focus on whether or not the provider is meeting the standards and we are guided by whether people are experiencing the outcomes they should be able to expect when the standards are being met. By outcomes we mean the impact care has on the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service, and the experience they have whilst receiving it. Our inspectors judge if any action is required by the provider of the service to improve the standard of care being provided. Where providers are non-compliant with the regulations, we take enforcement action against them. If we require a service to take action, or if we take enforcement action, we re-inspect it before its next routine inspection was due. This could mean we re-inspect a service several times in one year. We also might decide to reinspect a service if new concerns emerge about it before the next routine inspection. In between inspections we continually monitor information we have about providers. The information comes from the public, the provider, other organisations, and from care workers. You can tell us about your experience of this provider on our website. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 14
How we define our judgements The following pages show our findings and regulatory judgement for each essential standard or part of the standard that we inspected. Our judgements are based on the ongoing review and analysis of the information gathered by CQC about this provider and the evidence collected during this inspection. We reach one of the following judgements for each essential standard inspected. This means that the standard was being met in that the provider was compliant with the regulation. If we find that standards were met, we take no regulatory action but we may make comments that may be useful to the provider and to the public about minor improvements that could be made. Action needed This means that the standard was not being met in that the provider was non-compliant with the regulation. We may have set a compliance action requiring the provider to produce a report setting out how and by when changes will be made to make sure they comply with the standard. We monitor the implementation of action plans in these reports and, if necessary, take further action. We may have identified a breach of a regulation which is more serious, and we will make sure action is taken. We will report on this when it is complete. Enforcement action taken If the breach of the regulation was more serious, or there have been several or continual breaches, we have a range of actions we take using the criminal and/or civil procedures in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and relevant regulations. These enforcement powers include issuing a warning notice; restricting or suspending the services a provider can offer, or the number of people it can care for; issuing fines and formal cautions; in extreme cases, cancelling a provider or managers registration or prosecuting a manager or provider. These enforcement powers are set out in law and mean that we can take swift, targeted action where services are failing people. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 15
How we define our judgements (continued) Where we find non-compliance with a regulation (or part of a regulation), we state which part of the regulation has been breached. Only where there is non compliance with one or more of Regulations 9-24 of the Regulated Activity Regulations, will our report include a judgement about the level of impact on people who use the service (and others, if appropriate to the regulation). This could be a minor, moderate or major impact. Minor impact - people who use the service experienced poor care that had an impact on their health, safety or welfare or there was a risk of this happening. The impact was not significant and the matter could be managed or resolved quickly. Moderate impact - people who use the service experienced poor care that had a significant effect on their health, safety or welfare or there was a risk of this happening. The matter may need to be resolved quickly. Major impact - people who use the service experienced poor care that had a serious current or long term impact on their health, safety and welfare, or there was a risk of this happening. The matter needs to be resolved quickly We decide the most appropriate action to take to ensure that the necessary changes are made. We always follow up to check whether action has been taken to meet the standards. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 16
Glossary of terms we use in this report Essential standard The essential standards of quality and safety are described in our Guidance about compliance: Essential standards of quality and safety. They consist of a significant number of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 and the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. These regulations describe the essential standards of quality and safety that people who use health and adult social care services have a right to expect. A full list of the standards can be found within the Guidance about compliance. The 16 essential standards are: Respecting and involving people who use services - Outcome 1 (Regulation 17) Consent to care and treatment - Outcome 2 (Regulation 18) Care and welfare of people who use services - Outcome 4 (Regulation 9) Meeting Nutritional Needs - Outcome 5 (Regulation 14) Cooperating with other providers - Outcome 6 (Regulation 24) Safeguarding people who use services from abuse - Outcome 7 (Regulation 11) Cleanliness and infection control - Outcome 8 (Regulation 12) Management of medicines - Outcome 9 (Regulation 13) Safety and suitability of premises - Outcome 10 (Regulation 15) Safety, availability and suitability of equipment - Outcome 11 (Regulation 16) Requirements relating to workers - Outcome 12 (Regulation 21) Staffing - Outcome 13 (Regulation 22) Supporting Staff - Outcome 14 (Regulation 23) Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision - Outcome 16 (Regulation 10) Complaints - Outcome 17 (Regulation 19) Records - Outcome 21 (Regulation 20) Regulated activity These are prescribed activities related to care and treatment that require registration with CQC. These are set out in legislation, and reflect the services provided. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 17
Glossary of terms we use in this report (continued) (Registered) Provider There are several legal terms relating to the providers of services. These include registered person, service provider and registered manager. The term 'provider' means anyone with a legal responsibility for ensuring that the requirements of the law are carried out. On our website we often refer to providers as a 'service'. Regulations We regulate against the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 and the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. Responsive inspection This is carried out at any time in relation to identified concerns. Routine inspection This is planned and could occur at any time. We sometimes describe this as a scheduled inspection. Themed inspection This is targeted to look at specific standards, sectors or types of care. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 18
Contact us Phone: 03000 616161 Email: enquiries@cqc.org.uk Write to us at: Care Quality Commission Citygate Gallowgate Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4PA Website: www.cqc.org.uk Copyright Copyright (2011) Care Quality Commission (CQC). This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part, free of charge, in any format or medium provided that it is not used for commercial gain. This consent is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and on proviso that it is not used in a derogatory manner or misleading context. The material should be acknowledged as CQC copyright, with the title and date of publication of the document specified. Inspection Report Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital October 2013 www.cqc.org.uk 19