We carried out a review of the data available to us about Marley Grove on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Marley Grove, you can give feedback on this service.
People's experience of using this service and what we found
People were supported by staff that knew how to keep them safe. Staff knew how to raise safeguarding concerns with the provider, the relevant safeguarding body and the Care Quality Commission (CQC). People had risk assessments in place associated with their care. Staff followed the guidance within the assessments to ensure people received safe care.
People were supported by enough numbers of staff that were safely recruited to meet their needs. Staff supported people to take their prescribed medicines safely and followed good practice infection control guidelines to prevent the spread of infection.
People were supported by a caring and compassionate staff team. Staff ensured people’s dignity and respect was always promoted and protected. They supported people to maintain relationships with friends and family and develop new relationships.
The training staff received ensured they had the right skills and knowledge to meet people's needs. Staff were alert and responsive to any changes in people's needs and promptly liaised with the appropriate health professionals. People were supported to attend routine health checks and medical appointments.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The registered manager monitored the quality of care and support people experienced and acted on people's feedback to drive continual improvements in the service. Policies, procedures and other information was made available to people in formats that met their communication needs, such as easy read and picture styles.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (Published 20 May 2017).
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People using the service felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and felt confident in how to report them.
People had risk assessments in place which enabled them to be as independent as they could be in a safe manner. Staff knew how to manage risks to promote people’s safety, and balanced these against people’s rights to take risks and remain independent.
There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service. Staff were not offered employment until satisfactory checks had been completed. Staff received a comprehensive induction and on-going training. They had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current best practice when supporting people. They were supported with regular supervisions.
Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service.
People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people. Staff gained consent before supporting people.
People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required to enable people to access a balanced diet. There was access to drinks and snacks throughout the day.
People were supported to access a variety of health professional when required, including opticians, doctors and hospital appointments to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.
Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support.
People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.
People were supported to follow their interests and join in activities of their choice.
People knew how to complain. There was a complaints procedure in place and accessible to all.
Quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The inspection took place on 30 June & 3 July 2015 and was unannounced.
Marley Grove is a group of four homes which provide personal care for up to nine people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection nine people were using the service.
There was a manager employed. The manager was not registered, however; they were going through the process of registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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 felt safe living at the service. Staff were aware of what they considered to be abuse and how to report this.
Staff knew how to use risk assessments to keep people safe alongside supporting them to be as independent as possible.
There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs.
Recruitment processes were robust. New staff had undertaken the provider’s induction programme and training to allow them to support people confidently.
Medicines were stored, administered and handled safely.
Staff were knowledgeable about the needs of individual people they supported. People were supported to make choices around their care and daily lives.
Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when assisting people.
Staff always gained consent before supporting people.
There were policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff knew how to use them to protect people who were unable to make decisions for themselves.
People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required.
People had access to a variety of health care professionals if required to make sure they received on-going treatment and care.
People were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff, who spent time with them on activities of their choice.
People and their relatives were involved in making decisions and planning their care, and their views were listened to and acted upon.
Staff treated people with dignity and respect.
There was a complaints procedure in place which people were aware of.
People were complimentary about the manager and staff. Staff, people who used the service and the registered manager had good relationships.
Effective quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvements.
We heard staff speak to people in a knowledgeable and respectful way. We saw that people were encouraged to be as independent as they were able to be and to make day to day choices. We saw that Marley Grove was well managed and that the records were well kept. We noted that arrangements were in place which ensured that peoples physical health needs were addressed as we saw that regular appointments with GP's and other healthcare professionals were in place.
We saw that the houses within Marley Grove were clean and well maintained and had been decorated to reflect people's interests.
We saw that all the people were involved in the planning of their support needs. We saw that the environment within Marley Grove was very clean, tidy and well maintained. We saw that people had been able to display their chosen possessions in the homely environment. We spoke with staff who enjoyed having the ability to support people to achieve their goals in life such as a holiday to celebrate a special occasion.