Background to this inspection
Updated
15 November 2016
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 inspection took place on 8 August 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by a single inspector.
Before the inspection the provider had completed a Provider Information Record (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider for key information about the service, what the service does well, and what improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed our records about the service, including previous inspection reports, statutory notifications and enquiries. We also obtained information from a local authority that commissioned the service at the home.
During our visit we met four people who lived at the home, but they were unable to communicate with us verbally or tell us how they felt about the service as they had communication impairment related to autistic spectrum conditions. However, we were able to spend time observing care and support being delivered in the communal areas, including interactions between staff members and people who used the service. We also spoke with two family members. In addition we spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager and two members of the care team. We looked at records, which included the care records for three people who lived at the home,four staff records, policies and procedures, medicines records, and records relating to the management of the home.
Updated
15 November 2016
Our inspection of 11 Pear Close took place on 8 August 2016 and was unannounced. At our last inspection we found that the home was meeting the outcomes that we assessed.
11 Pear Close is a care home registered for six people with autistic spectrum conditions situated in Kingsbury. At the time of our inspection there were five people living there .The people who used the service had significant support needs including cognitive and communication impairments and behaviours considered challenging.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
Family members that we spoke with told us that they considered that their relatives were safe at the home. We saw that people were comfortable and familiar with the staff supporting them.
People who lived at the home were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff members had received training in safeguarding, and were able to demonstrate their role in ensuring that people were safe and that concerns were reported appropriately.
Medicines at the service were well managed. People’s medicines were managed and given to them appropriately and records of medicines were well maintained.
We saw that staff at the home supported people in a caring and respectful way, and responded promptly to meet their needs and requests. There were enough staff members on duty to meet the needs of the people using the service.
We were satisfied that staff who worked at the home received regular relevant training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. Appropriate checks took place as part of the recruitment process to ensure that staff were suitable for the work that they would be undertaking. All staff members received regular supervision from a manager, and those whom we spoke with told us that they felt well supported.
The home was meeting the requirements of The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Information about capacity was included in people’s care plans. Applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations had been made to the relevant local authority to ensure that people who were unable to make decisions were not inappropriately restricted. Staff members had received training in MCA and DoLS, and those we spoke with were able to describe their roles and responsibilities in relation to supporting people who lacked capacity to make decisions.
People’s nutritional needs were well met. Meals provided were varied and met guidance provided in people’s care plans. Alternatives were offered where required, and drinks and snacks were offered to people throughout the day.
People’s care plans and risk assessments were person centred and provided detailed guidance for staff around meeting people’s needs. These had been updated regularly and reflected any changes in people’s care and support needs.
The home provided a range of activities for people to participate in throughout the week. Staff members supported people to participate in these activities. People’s cultural and religious needs were supported by the service and detailed information about these was contained in people’s care plans.
A complaints procedure was in place and this was available in an easy to read format. The home’s complaints log showed that complaints had been addressed, although a family member told us that concerns that they had not always received a response in relation to concerns that they had raised.
The care documentation that we saw showed that people’s health needs were regularly reviewed. The home's records showed that there was regular liaison with health professionals to ensure that people received the support that they needed.
There were effective systems in place in relation to review and monitoring of the quality of support provided at the home. Regular monitoring had taken place, and action plans had been put in place and addressed where there were concerns. Policies and procedures were up to date.
The registered manager told us that the home would be closing during the coming months and people would be moving to a supported living service managed by the provider. The family members that we spoke with confirmed that they had been consulted about this.