We carried out an unannounced inspection of the service on 7 and 25 July 2016.

Wollaton Park Care Home provides accommodation to older people. It is registered for a maximum of 40 people. There were 35 people receiving care and support at the home at the time of our visit.

On the day of our inspection there was a registered manager in place. 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.

People told us they felt safe at the home. They were supported by staff who understood how to report allegations of harm. Risk assessments were in place to identify and reduce the risk to people’s safety. There was sufficient staff to keep people safe and medicines were stored and handled safely.

People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported by staff who were knowledgeable and skilled to carry out their roles and responsibilities. Training and development was reviewed and updated appropriately. People received sufficient amounts to eat and drink and enjoyed their meals. People had access to other healthcare professionals and received effective care that was relevant to their needs

People were treated with kindness and compassion and spoke highly of the staff. Staff interacted with people in a friendly and caring way. People’s privacy and dignity was protected and they felt able to contribute to decisions made about their care. Arrangements were in place for people to receive support from an independent advocate if they needed one.

People’s care records focused on people’s wishes and respected their views. Staff responded to people’s needs promptly. They encouraged people to participate in activities that were meaningful to them which reflected their needs. A complaints process was in place and staff knew how to respond to complaints.

People, relatives, staff, and healthcare professionals complimented the registered manager. People were empowered to contribute to the development of how the home was run. The registered manager actively sought people’s views and acted on them. There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. The home and staff was led by a registered manager who had a clear understanding of their role and how to improve the lives of all of the people living at the home. They had a robust auditing process in place that identified the risks to people and the home and they were dealt with quickly and effectively.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

This was an unannounced inspection, which meant we did not notify the care home of our visit. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. There was a registered manager in post on the day of our visit. There were no outstanding breaches from the last inspection.

Wollaton Park provided accommodation and nursing for up to 40 people who have nursing or dementia care needs. There were 33 people living in the home at the time of our inspection. The home also provided intermediate care for people who needed care and support on a short term basis, when they first left hospital.

We found that the provider did not make suitable arrangements to ensure people who lacked capacity received appropriate assessment.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. Staff were aware of the MCA, but lacked understanding of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant there was a risk that people could be restricted without the appropriate safeguards being in place.

This was a breach of Regulation of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2010. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

All of the people we spoke with told us they felt safe and that staff were kind and compassionate. We saw staff interacting with people in a calm and respectful way.

Staff we spoke with was caring and knowledgeable about the people they supported. They treated people with dignity and respected their privacy. People’s specific care needs were assessed and care workers were made aware of these in plans of care. They alerted health care professionals if they had any concerns.

We observed people participating in activities, such as reading newspapers, completing puzzle books and one person was knitting. We also saw staff supported people to be involved with the local community.

The provider had adequate systems required by regulations to assess and monitor the quality of service provision, but in relation to complaints and safeguarding referrals there were no audit trails. to ensure complaints were satisfactory addressed.

Staff training arrangements were good and staff we spoke with told us they attended training regularly to support them do their job. Other staff talked about the induction process and how they felt supported by the management.

We visited the home to follow up on improvements to the administration of medicines for people who used the service. We spoke to the manager of the location, looked at records and we watched medicines being administered to people. We found that appropriate arrangements for the recording, handling, dispensing and disposal of medicines were being made.

We visited the home over two days. We spoke with ten people who used the service, three relatives and four members of staff.

We saw information in each person’s room regarding Wollaton Park Care Home and what service they provided. People we spoke with told us they received enough information to help them make informed choices and they said, “Staff were attentive to people's needs.”

People we spoke with were unaware of any resident meetings that had taken place in the home however they said they could raise their opinions and concerns in other ways if they felt the need to do so.

The provider took steps to ensure people’s care and welfare was assessed to meet their needs.

Staff said they felt supported by the provider and felt they could acquire further skills and qualifications that were relevant to the work they did.

We found a number of concerns regarding medication. There were gaps identified in the records. The administration was not coherent. It was not easy to identify if a person had received the correct dosage of medication or if it was given at the correct time.

We observed staff were kind, caring and supportive of people, however this was not reflected in the records they kept for each individual. We found a number of shortfalls regarding the record keeping, there were gaps and very basic information to identify if the persons needs had been met.