You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The inspection took place on 16 June 2017 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 16 June 2015, the service was found to be meeting the required standards in the areas we looked at. Ganwick House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to eight people. The service supports people who may have a learning disability, autistic spectrum disorder or mental health problems. At the time of our inspection six people lived at the home.

There was a manager in post who had registered 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Safe and effective recruitment practices were not consistently followed to help ensure that all staff were suitably qualified and experienced. Arrangements were in place to ensure there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available at all times to meet people’s individual needs.

Trained staff helped people to take their medicines at the right time. Identified and potential risks to people’s health and well-being were reviewed. However audits had not identified a medicine error that had occurred.

People felt safe, happy and well looked after at the home. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and knew how to report concerns, both internally and externally

Staff obtained people’s consent before providing personal care and support, which they did in a kind and compassionate way.

Plans and guidance had been drawn up to help staff deal with unforeseen events and emergencies. The environment and equipment used were regularly checked and well maintained to keep people safe.

People were supported by staff that were sufficiently trained and felt supported. The service worked in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People received a varied and balanced diet and had regular access to health and social care professionals.

People were treated with dignity and respect. People were involved in planning their care and their choices and preferences were promoted. Records were stored securely.

People received care that met their needs and their care plans were detailed and person centred. Activities and opportunities for engagement were provided. People knew how to make a complaint but there had not been any recent complaints.

People, their relatives and staff were positive about the management team. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was not consistently safe.

People were not consistently supported to take their medicines safely by trained staff.

Safe and effective recruitment practices were not consistently followed to help ensure that all staff were fit, able and qualified to do their jobs.

People were kept safe by staff trained to recognise and respond effectively to the risks of abuse.

Sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people’s individual needs at all times.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff that were sufficiently trained and felt supported.

The service worked in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People received a varied and balanced diet.

There was regular access to health and social care professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was caring.

People were cared for in a kind and compassionate way by staff that knew them well and were familiar with their needs.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

People were involved in planning their care and their preferences were promoted.

Confidentiality of people’s personal information had been maintained.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care that met their needs.

Guidance made available to staff enabled them to provide person centred care and support.

People were supported to maintain social interests and take part in meaningful activities relevant to their needs.

People and their relatives were confident to raise concerns which were dealt with promptly.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was well led.

Systems were in place to quality assure the services provided, manage risks and drive improvement.

People and staff were very positive about the registered manager and how the home operated.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and felt well supported by the management team.