Archived: Walsingham Support - 86 Baker Street

responsive, safe, effective and well led? The inspection was carried out by one inspector over one day.

Below is a summary of our findings.

Is the service safe?

We looked at two care plans and found that these were detailed and centred on the person's needs including information about their lifestyles, communication, behaviour support plan and their likes and dislikes. The care plans included risk assessments for areas such as, epilepsy and assisting people to move safely.

The communal toilets and bathrooms we saw had wall mounted liquid soap dispensers and towels for people to use. This meant people were provided equipment to help maintain good hygiene. The provider used a colour coded system, for example, different coloured mops, buckets and clothes were used to clean different areas in the home. This meant there was a system in place to prevent the spread of infection through cross contamination.

Is the service effective?

The care plans we saw had risk assessments that had been reviewed monthly. We saw evidence from the care plans that risks had been assessed and instructions on how the risks should be managed by staff, was provided so that people were kept safe. For example one person care plan had a procedure in place for their moving and handling with clear guidance for staff. We spoke to staff and they were able to evidence their knowledge of people's care plans.

Is the service caring?

We spoke to four people and three staff. One person said, "I am very happy here, got my independence and I have lots of hobbies. Staff are very good here and I feel supported." One carer said, 'It's a good care home, we meet our resident's needs. There are the opportunities to make choices and get involved. There is positive communication between people and staff." We observed good interaction between people and staff for example, we saw carers offered food and drinks to people regularly and carers spoke to people in a respectful and friendly manner

Is the service responsive?

There was clear guidance for staff to follow in the care plans to assist them to promote good care. The care plans were reviewed each month and any changes to people's needs were updated if their condition or health changed.

We saw the complaints policy and the complaints log. Complaints were dealt with in line with the service policy. One person said, when asked if they knew how to complain. 'I would speak to the manager or my support worker if I had a complaint.' There were complaint forms in the entrance hall way, these were in an easy to read format.

Is the service well-led?

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service. We saw that yearly surveys were sent out to people who used the service, their families and/or advocates. There were monthly resident meetings. All the surveys we saw were produced in an easy to read format with pictures. There were 'employee satisfaction surveys' for staff. This meant that people views and opinions were being sought. Information from the surveys, meetings and audits was used to develop the home's quality assurance plan, to improve the quality of service.

One person told us "it is nice living here" and "staff look after me".

We observed that one person was visibly happy as they were supported by staff to carry out some domestic tasks. They told us "I like it here and I go shopping. I get of choice of what to do."

Another person said the home "was nice" and that staff helped them with their medications.

We observed that the staff demonstrated a gentle, respectful and cheerful approach to the people who used the service and that there was a high level of interaction between the staff and the people.

The home was suitable for the people who used the service and was homely in appearance. The general decor was of good standard and the environment in the bedroom we saw reflected the person's choices and wishes.

We looked at three people's careplans and found that they had not been regularly reviewed and that there were not fully reflective of people's needs, presenting risks that the care provided did not reflect their current needs and may not have been appropriate to meet their needs where changes may have occurred.

There were not effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection as areas of the home were not clean and people did not have access to appropriate handwashing facilities.

People were being supported to lead active lives in the community and follow their own interests. We identified staff were available to support them.

We noted that people had been provided with opportunities to give their views within the service and wider Walsingham organisation. One person we met had been able to act as an advocate for service user's rights.

We identified that there were suitable arrangements in place that ensured people received their prescribed medicines safely.

We observed that 86 Baker Street provided people with a warm, clean home to live in that had been adapted, where required to suit people's diverse needs. People had personalised their rooms to reflect their individual personalities and interests.

We identified that there were procedures in place that ensured appropriate staff were recruited and provided with training and on-going supervision, to ensure they worked safely and in the interests of the people living at 86 Baker Street.