Background to this inspection
Updated
23 April 2015
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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This unannounced inspection took place over two days, 9/10 January 2015. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.
Prior to the inspection visit we gathered information from a number of sources. We looked at the information received about the service from notifications sent to the Care Quality Commission by the registered manager. Prior to our inspection visit we had received a provider information return. A provider information return is a form completed by the registered manager outlining details about the service and the care and support provided.
The inspector visited the offices on the 9 January to look at records around how people were cared for and supported. We looked at five care plans, two staff recruitment files, spoke to the supervisor and the administrative assistant. The registered manager was on annual leave at the time of our inspection.
On 10th January the inspector visited two of the houses where people who were supported by this service lived and spoke to five people who used this service. We also spoke to the supervisor who was on call and three support workers. We asked people what they thought about the service and were verbal communication was limited we observed the interaction between the staff and the people they supported.
Updated
23 April 2015
This announced inspection took place on 9th January. 2015. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a supported living service for people with a variety of needs including, learning disabilities, mental health conditions, physical disabilities and sensory impairments; The people using this service often accessed community services and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.
During our previous inspection visit on the 10th October 2013 we found the service met all the national standards we looked at. Since then there had been no incidents or concerns raised that needed investigation.
There was a registered manager in post on the day of our inspection visit. 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.
The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.
At the time of our inspection the service provided support to 23 people who lived in eight properties in the Carlisle area. During our inspection we spoke with 5 people who lived in two different properties. We spoke to three support staff, two supervisors and the administrative assistant. We spoke to the registered manager following her return from annual leave.
We found that people who used this service were safe. The support workers knew how to protect people from harm. All staff had completed training in safety of vulnerable adults and knew the signs to look for and how to and report any areas of concern. There were good systems to ensure people knew the staff that supported them.
Cumbria Care, the registered provider, had put in place robust recruitment procedures to ensure only suitable people worked in this service. We saw that staffing levels were good throughout all areas of the service. Staff training was up to date. All staff were supported by the management team through regular staff supervision and appraisals.
The service worked well with external agencies such as social services, other care providers and mental health professionals to provide appropriate care to meet people’s physical and emotional needs.
Observations during our inspection evidenced people were given choices about how they wanted to be supported and live their lives. Opportunities were given to people to go out into the community visit their families and go on holiday.
The service followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Code of practice. This helped to protect the rights of people who were not able to make important decisions themselves. Best interest meetings were held to assist people who were not always able to make difficult decisions for themselves.
Healthcare needs were met through close working relationships with the GPs and district nursing service. Access to external mental health professional services was available.
Support staff knew the people they supported well. They provided a caring environment for people to live in. We saw people being treated in a dignified manner with their privacy upheld at all times.
Personalised care plans were in place in a format that was suitable through pictures and symbols as well as writing. People who used the service had a voice through regular tenants meetings held in each of the houses.
There was an appropriate internal quality monitoring procedure in place. This ensured people were cared for and supported in the way they wanted to be.