The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Voyage 1 Limited - 836 Walsall Road

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Great Barr, Birmingham, West Midlands, B42 1ES (0121) 358 0009

Provided and run by:
Voyage 1 Limited

All Inspections

8 October 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 8 October 2015 and was unannounced. At our last inspection in October 2013 the provider was compliant with all the regulations we looked at.

Voyage 1 836 Walsall Road is a residential home which provides care to people who have learning disabilities. The service is registered with the Commission to provide personal care for up to four people and at the time of our inspection there were four people using the service. There was a registered manager at this location. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were kept safe from the risk of harm by staff who could recognise the signs of abuse.

The provider had conducted assessments to identify if people were at risk of harm and how this could be reduced. Staff constantly asked people if they required support and provided reassurance when necessary.

People had their needs and requests responded to promptly. All the relatives and staff we spoke with told us that they felt there were enough staff to meet people’s care needs. Staff vacancies had recently been appointed to and several new members of staff were undergoing an induction process.

Medication was managed safely. Staff were able to explain the provider’s protocols for the administration and reporting of medication errors. The registered manager conducted regular audits and we saw that any errors had been dealt with appropriately.

People were supported by staff who had received regular training and supervisions to maintain their skills and knowledge. Relatives and health professionals who supported people who used the service told us they felt that staff supported people in line with their instructions and care plans.

People were regularly asked by staff if they were happy and how they wanted to be supported. One member of staff showed us a guide to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) which they carried with them as a reminder of their responsibilities to seek the consent of the people they supported.

When people were thought to lack mental capacity the provider had taken the appropriate action to ensure their care did not restrict their movement and rights under the MCA. Decisions about the care people received were made by the people who had the legal right to do so.

A person who used the service told us they enjoyed the food they were given. Staff knew what people liked to eat and demonstrated they knew peoples’ gestures for when they wanted a drink. This enabled people to eat and drink enough.

People said or indicated they were happy to be supported by the service. We observed people had developed caring relationships with the staff who supported them. Relatives said there was a positive atmosphere in the home. People were encouraged by staff to take part in tasks around the home if they wanted. This promoted people’s independence.

Staff supported people to engage in interests they knew were important to them. When requested people had been supported to visit relatives at home and also speak to them on the telephone.

People felt that concerns would be sorted out quickly without the need to resort to the formal complaints process. Relatives told us that any issues were dealt with appropriately and to their satisfaction.

All the people we spoke with were happy to be supported by the service and were pleased with how it was managed. People were encouraged to express their views about the service and felt involved in directing how their care was provided and developed.

The registered manager had obtained and shared examples of good practice from some of the provider’s other locations to ensure the service continued to develop.

The service had a clear leadership structure which staff understood. Staff told us and we saw that they had annual appraisals and regular supervisions to identify how they could best improve the care people received.

The provider had processes for monitoring and improving the quality of the care people received. When an adverse event occurred the registered manager had identified the actions to prevent a similar incident from reoccurring. The provider conducted regular audits and we saw that action plans had been put in place when it was identified improvements were needed.

16 October 2013

During a routine inspection

When we visited we found that the home provided care for three people. Some of the people using the services had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We used a variety of methods to help us understand the quality of the care people received. We spoke to four care staff and the manager. We looked at the care records and policies and watched how people received care. We were accompanied by a person who had experience of supporting people with complex needs. We were unable to speak to people's relatives.

Records showed that the people who used the service and their relatives were involved in planning their care. People told us, 'I really like it here' and 'all the staff are very good.'

People received sufficient quantities of food and drink to meet their needs and were supported to make choices about what they ate and drank.

The provider had robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure that people employed at the service were of good character and had the necessary skills, qualifications and knowledge to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements for managing medicines safely.

There were good arrangements for making sure that standards of care and support were monitored and improved, where necessary. We saw that the manager approached relatives to comment on the quality of care people received.

26 March 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited 836 Walsall Road because when we carried out a scheduled inspection in December 2012 we were concerned that the provider had not ensured that some fixtures and fittings were properly maintained or repaired. This meant that people who used the service, staff and visitors were not protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises. We also asked the provider to tell us what they would do to put things right.

During this visit we used a number of different methods to help understand the experiences of people using the service. Some people had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We spoke with one relative, two staff members and the manager. We also looked at people's care records and the location's maintenance records. We also checked to see if the provider had done what they said they would do to put things right after our last inspection.

We saw the provider had taken steps to ensure fixtures and fittings were adequately maintained to meet the care and welfare needs of the people who used the service. A relative of a person told us they had no concerns with how the property was maintained and was pleased with the quality of their relative's accommodation. Staff told us they were not aware of any outstanding maintenance issues and felt the support from their maintenance department had improved since our last visit.

21 December 2012

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help understand the experiences of people using the service. Some people had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We spoke with one relative, three staff members, the manager and operations manager. We also spoke with a GP and nurse who provide care to the people who use the service.

We saw that staff at the home treated people with warmth and kindness. A relative told us, 'I have always had a good experience. Staff are very helpful.'

The people who use the service were involved in influencing the care and welfare they received. We saw records of resident's meetings which showed how people's views were used to improve the service.

Care was planned and designed to meet the individual health and welfare needs of the people who used the service. A nurse we spoke to said, 'Staff are very conscientious about the needs of the service users'.

We saw that the provider had made suitable arrangements to ensure that people living at the home were safeguarded against the risk of abuse.

The provider had not taken adequate steps to ensure some fixtures and fittings were adequately maintained.

We found that care workers were skilled, qualified and competent to provide people with the care they needed to meet their individual needs.

The provider was able to protect people against the risk of unsafe care and treatment by regularly assessing and monitoring the quality of the service provided.

6 March 2012

During a routine inspection

We met all four of the people who live at this home, and an expert by experience spent time speaking in more detail to two people. We found that people had lived together for some time, and that generally people got on well together.

People told us about the activities they enjoyed doing. " I like knitting, watching my favourite programmes and films." People also told us they liked going to church and having "Danny the music man" visit the home.People also told us they were able to attend local day centres and go to a disco one evening a week.

We asked people how they were involved around the home. We were told, "We have meetings around the table, where we can talk" and that the area manager comes once a month and speaks with people to make sure everything is alright. During our visit we saw people being supported to help with the preparation of packed lunches, and the evening meal.

People who were able told us they liked living at this home. Some people were not able to use words to communicate, but we saw that they looked happy and settled. Staff responded quickly when they expressed themselves.