Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Inver House, Bembridge.

Inver House in Bembridge is a Residential home specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs and dementia. The last inspection date here was 4th October 2018

Inver House is managed by Somerset Care Limited who are also responsible for 34 other locations

Contact Details:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Outstanding
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2018-10-04
    Last Published 2018-10-04

Local Authority:

    Isle of Wight

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

2nd August 2018 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

This inspection took place on 2 and 6 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Inver House is a ‘care home’ owned by Somerset Care Limited. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided. The inspection team looked at both during this visit.

Inver House is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to 50 people. At the time of the inspection, there were 44 people living at the home. The provider divided the home into three units. One unit provided care and support to older people and the other two units provided care and support to people who were living with dementia. Two lifts are available to assist people to access the upper floors. The home has several dining areas and lounges, there was also a hair salon and communal IT facilities are available for people to use if they wished. The grounds were well-maintained and accessible to people living in the home.

At our last inspection, we rated the service as Good in all key question areas of Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. At this inspection we found the information supported the rating of Good with the key question of Responsive which had improved to a rating of Outstanding.

At the time of this inspection, there was a manager in place who had taken over the overall running of the service in the absence of the registered manager. The manager had commenced the registration process with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe living at Inver House. People were protected from the risks of abuse and staff were trained in recognising and reporting safeguarding concerns. Safeguarding investigations were thorough and identified learning to help prevent a reoccurrence.

Individual and environmental risks to people were managed effectively. Risk assessments identified risks to people and provided clear guidance to staff on how risks should be managed and mitigated.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and staff were able to support people in a relaxed and unhurried way. Appropriate recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure only suitable staff were employed.

People received their medicines safely and as prescribed. Appropriate arrangements were in place for obtaining, recording, administering and disposing of prescribed medicines.

People were protected from the risk of infection. Staff had received infection control training. The home was visibly clean and well maintained and infection control audits were completed regularly.

People’s needs were met by staff who were competent, trained and supported appropriately in their role. Staff acted in the best interests of people and followed legislation designed to protect people’s rights and freedom.

People had access to health professionals and other specialists if they needed them. Staff worked in partnership with healthcare professionals to support people at the end of their lives to have a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death.

Procedures were in place to help ensure that people received consistent support when they moved between services.

People were provided with enough to eat and drink and mealtimes were a relaxed and sociable experience for people. Where people had specific dietary requirements, these were known by staff and catered for.

Staff treated people with kindness, respect, and compassion. People were actively involved in making decisions about their care. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and encouraged the independence of people living at the home.

People's cultural and diversity needs w

29th July 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We spoke with eight of the 45 people living at Inver House and met other people. They told us they were well cared for and staff knew their needs. One person told us “[staff] are very attentive and caring”. People said they were involved in their care planning and had no concerns about their care. We spoke with four visitors. They told us they were satisfied with the care their relatives received. One told us “people are always happy” when they visit. A visiting professional said “it is very homely here, there is always a lovely atmosphere”.

Staff were respectful and patient with people. In the dementia unit, known as Petals, we used observation to help us understand people’s experiences. We saw staff took time to help people understand their care, were unhurried and kind with people. We spoke with four care staff. They were fully aware of people’s particular health and social care needs. We observed staff offering people choices and respecting people’s wishes.

All areas of the home were clean and well maintained. We spoke with two domestic staff who were aware of infection control procedures.

We viewed two staff records. These contained all the relevant information and checks carried out before employment commenced. A range of quality assurance measures were in place. Feedback from these was acted on to improve the service for people.

26th November 2012 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

This inspection was following up on concerns identified during an inspections carried out on 28 August 2012 when minor concerns were identified regarding medicines management.

We did not on this occasion speak to people. We spoke with the manager and staff and looked at how the service was managing people’s medicines. We also looked at medication records. The home had taken immediate action to address the concerns we found in August 2012.

28th August 2012 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We spoke with 12 of the 46 people who lived at the home. We met other people and spent some time in the home’s communal areas observing people and the way they were cared for. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk to us, which helped us observe particular people and activities over a set period of time.

People told us that they could make decisions and that the staff were nice. People said that they had no concerns about how their care needs were met. People commented that they could make choices and these were respected. For example one person said “if you don’t want to get up the staff will come back later”, another person said “they organise various activities and you can choose to join in or not, I like the music ones most”. People also told us that if they were unwell then staff would contact a doctor for them and that staff gave them their medication. We were told that staff were available when people needed them and knew what care they required.

We spoke with three health professional involved in the care of people. They stated that they had no concerns about how people’s health and care needs were met and were complimentary about the way the service met people’s needs.

Everyone we spoke with confirmed that people’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times. People told us staff always knocked on their bedroom doors and waited for a response before entering. People told us the staff were wonderful and that they felt safe and happy at the home.

People said that if they had any concerns or complaints they would raise these with the manager.

1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

This inspection was unannounced and was carried out on 01 and 02 December 2015.

Inver House is a care home owned by Somerset Care Limited. It provides care for up to 53 older adults. The home has two sections, the main home and the Petals unit. The main home provides care for up to 37 older people, some of whom have physical disabilities and varying levels of mental frailty. The Petals unit provides care in a secure environment for up to 16 people who are living with a diagnosis of dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 40 people living in the home, 26 in the main home and 14 in Petals unit.

The home provides care over two floors. Petals unit is located on the ground floor and the main residential rooms are spread over the ground and first floor. Two lifts are available to assist people to access the upper floors. The home has several dining areas and lounges. The grounds are well-maintained and accessible to people living in the home. A hair salon and communal IT facilities are available for people to use if they wish.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

After the comprehensive inspection in December 2014, we found the home had breached five regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. We received action plans from the provider stating what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to improving their service. At this inspection we found improvements had been made to all the areas of concern.

People felt safe in the home, and expressed their satisfaction with the way they were cared for. Staff took care to ensure people were supported safely whilst moving around, and attended to people’s needs promptly. Staff were trained to recognise the signs, and respond to allegations of abuse. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were known to staff and they took action to reduce these. Staff supported people in a safe manner, especially when equipment was required to enable them to move around the home safely.

Staff were subject to checks on their suitability before they were employed in the home. Staff and people had formed positive relationships and people said staff were kind and caring. A friendly and jovial atmosphere prevailed in the home and people appeared to be relaxed and calm. A range of activities was available and people joined in if they wanted to. Others preferred to observe or spend time in their rooms and staff respected this.

People consented before any care was provided and staff communicated with people when supporting them, ensuring they were comfortable and unhurried. Staff were fully aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and applied these appropriately when caring for people. People’s medicines were managed safely and administered in a caring and discreet manner. Staff responded quickly and appropriately if a person became unwell. People were supported to access healthcare and appointments outside of the home.

There were sufficient staff deployed to ensure people’s needs were met safely. Arrangements were in place to cover staff absences so that people received their care from staff that were familiar to them. Staff training was well-organised and effective and staff supervision was regular and purposeful. Staff felt supported and able to access support and guidance from their line managers and the registered manager.

People felt involved in decisions about their care and treatment. They gave regular feedback to the staff and the registered manager about their care and made suggestions for improvement. These were responded to positively and put in place where possible. People said they enjoyed the meals they were given and their feedback was sought regularly about the menus. People with specific dietary requirements were catered for. If people were at risk of dehydration or malnutrition action was taken to address this.

People were cared for as individuals and their preferences were recorded and respected. People’s care and support plans reflected their current needs and were reviewed and updated regularly. Care records were written in a positive and respectful manner and staff reflected this in the way they cared for people. People said their privacy was respected and they were cared for in a dignified manner. Activities and trips to local places of interest were arranged. People could choose whether to engage in them or not.

The quality of the service provided was monitored through surveys, residents’ meetings and reviews of care. Where improvement was identified the registered manager took prompt action. People knew how to complain and complaints were dealt with promptly. People said any concerns they had were discussed with them and a solution was found as soon as possible.

 

 

Latest Additions: