Archived: Harp House

Updated 14 December 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 20 October 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we already held about the service. This included details of its registration, previous inspection reports and any notifications the service had sent us. We contacted the local authority with responsibility for commissioning care from the service to seek their views.

During the inspection we spoke with 15 people that used the service and three relatives. We spoke with nine staff. This included five care and support workers, the lead care and support worker, team leader, registered manager and the director of care. We reviewed five sets of records relating to people that used the service including care plans and risk assessments. We looked at training records for all staff using the service and recruitment records for six staff. We examined quality assurance procedures and medicine records. We viewed the minutes of staff meetings and looked at various policies and procedures including the complaints and safeguarding adults policies.

Updated 14 December 2016

This inspection took place on 20 October 2016 and was announced. At the previous inspection of this service in October the service was rated as requires improvement. During that inspection we found three breaches of regulations. This was because the service had not notified the Care Quality Commission of safeguarding allegations, the service did not have adequate risk assessments in place to protect people from the risk of harm and the service did not have appropriate quality assurance and monitoring systems in place. During this inspection we found all these issues had been addressed.

Harp House is part of a community service provided by Triangle Community Services Limited. They provide an extra care service to older people who are tenants at Harp House, which is a sheltered housing unit. The service offers individuals personal care, support and 'extra care' they require to continue to live independently. Thirty people were using the service at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

We found one breach of Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because staff did not receive appropriate supervision in line with the provider’s procedure. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report. We also made two good practice recommendation in the report about staffing levels and quality assurance and monitoring processes.

Risk assessments were in place which included information about how to support people in a safe manner. Safeguarding procedures were in place and safeguarding allegations had been dealt with appropriately. Robust staff recruitment procedures were in place. Medicines were managed in a safe manner.

Staff undertook an induction training programme on commencing work at the service and received on-going training after that. People were able to make choices for themselves where they had the capacity to do so and the service operated within the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people were supported with food preparation they were able to choose what they ate and drank. People were supported with medical appointments if required.

People told us they were treated with respect and that staff were caring. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, independence and dignity.

People’s needs were assessed before they began using the service. Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs. The service had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

Staff told us they found the senior staff to be approachable and helpful. The service had various quality assurance and monitoring systems in place. Some of these included seeking the views of people that used the service.