Archived: Harewood House

We saw the registered manager had carried out a full review of each of the supported living houses. We saw the registered manager had checked the quality of the service, and had involved people and their relatives in reviews about the care service. We saw there were now monthly checks of care, medication and finance records, to make sure the service was meeting people's needs in the right way.

We looked at care records. We saw these had been reviewed so they were accurate and up to date. We saw the support plans about each person's care were very detailed. We saw the support plans were regularly reviewed so they showed people's well-being and whether there had been any changes.

We spoke with two relatives by telephone regarding people's care. They told us they were satisfied with the care people received. One person said the care was 'fantastic' there was a wide variety of things for people to do. Their relative had regular reviews and they felt that they were included in this. The second relative we spoke with said the care was 'wonderful' and staff were very supportive and 'delightful'.

We found that people were given care, treatment and support which met their needs. People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard. The provider had some systems in place to monitor the quality of service however people were not protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment as personal records were not accurate or fit for purpose and audits were out of date or unclear.