Archived: 23 Barncroft Street

Updated 8 June 2017

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.

Our inspection was unannounced and took place on 02 May 2017. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

We asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return [PIR]. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The form was returned so we were able to take information into account when we planned our inspection. We asked the local authority their views on the service provided. We also reviewed the information we held about the service. Providers are required by law to notify us about events and incidents that occur; we refer to these as ‘notifications’. We looked at the notifications the provider had sent to us. We used the information we had gathered to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection.

We met and spoke with all of the people who lived at the home. We spoke with three care staff, the deputy manager, the manager and a senior manager. We looked at the care files for two people, medicine records for two people, recruitment records for two staff, training and supervision records for two staff, complaints, safeguarding and quality monitoring processes. We also looked at provider feedback forms that had been completed by people who lived at the home.

Updated 8 June 2017

Our inspection took place on 02 May 2017 and was unannounced.

At our last inspection on 09 February 2015 the service was meeting all of the regulations that we assessed.

The provider is registered to accommodate and deliver personal care to four people. People who live there may have a learning disability or associated need. On the day four people lived at the home.

The manager was not registered with us as is required by law. However, they had applied for registration to address this. 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.

Medicine systems did not always demonstrate safety or confirm that people had been given their medicines as they had been prescribed. Staff were available to keep people safe, to allow care and support to be provided flexibly and to meet all people’s needs. Staff knew the procedures they should follow to ensure the risk of harm and/or abuse was reduced. Recruitment processes ensured that unsuitable staff were not employed.

Documents had not been completed to ensure that external professionals would have all of the information they required to meet people’s needs safely or in their preferred way. Staff had received the training they required to give them the knowledge they needed to support people safely. Staff knew that people must receive care in line with their best interests and not be unlawfully restricted. People were encouraged to make decisions about their care. Meal options were offered to ensure that people’s food and drink preferences were catered for. Input from external healthcare professionals was secured to meet people’s healthcare needs.

The provider ensured a homely friendly atmosphere within the service. People were supported by staff who were kind and caring. People were treated with dignity and respect. People were encouraged to make decisions about their care and support and their independence was promoted. People could see their family when they wished to.

People were involved in their pre-admission assessment of need and follow on reviews. Systems were in place for people and their relatives to raise their concerns or complaints if they had a need to. People could attend religious services of their choice if they wished to. People accessed leisure activities on a regular basis that they enjoyed.

Although people felt that the quality of service was good a consistent manager had not been available. The manager and provider undertook regular audits but these had not always determined shortfalls that could have an impact on people’s safety. People were aware of who the new manager and deputy manager were and were relaxed in their company. The provider had made money available to enhance some areas of the premises.