Archived: Housing & Care 21 - Prospect Place

This service has deregistered since we inspected it, therefore we are limited as to what action we can take against the provider.

We set out to answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with people using the service, the staff supporting them and looking at records. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Each person had a support plan which reflected their specific needs. The support plans clearly described the support each person required at different times of the day.

We found that medication errors had occurred. The errors had not been investigated or followed up.

Some care files and records were not up to date. We saw that people who used the service had an out of date statement of purpose.

Is the service effective?

Daily records showed that people had received their support and staff had supported people to make choices.

Staff had not received training to support them to provide care and support to people living with Dementia.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service told us that the care was very good and that staff were lovely.

We observed that staff respected people's privacy and that they knocked on doors before entering the person's home. Staff spoke with people who used the service in a kind and gentle manner.

Is the service responsive?

People told us that the call bells were answered quickly.

The provider had responded to complaints promptly and apologised when things had not gone well.

Is the service well-led?

People who used the service had not had the opportunity to provide feedback to someone that had not been involved in their care.

The provider had carried out an audit of the service but had not completed the tasks set within the action plan.

At this visit we found that assessments had been made when people were identified as being at particular risk, for example of falling. We read action plans that showed that professional advice had been sought when necessary to help reduce the risks to people.

We read detailed support plans which recorded each aspect of the care people needed, and saw that daily notes made by staff evidenced that care was given in line with people's care plans.

We spoke with six people about their experiences of the service.One person told us: "The carers are brilliant, I couldn't fault them, they do anything and deserve praise".People said that staff understood their needs and gave them appropriate support.

We read care files and medicine records for nine people using the service. We found that the recording, monitoring and administration of medicines remained unsafe and that staff were not following the provider's medication policy.

We found that records of people's care were not always up to date or accurate which could place people at risk of receiving inappropriate or unsafe care.

We spoke with six people about their experience of the service. One person told us that some of the staff were 'More like friends than carers' but said they were not as happy with other staff. Another person described receiving 'Slap-dash care' with no consistency or continuity between staff.

We found that staff understood the different forms that abuse could take and knew how to report any suspicions.

Medicines were not being appropriately managed and recorded by the service.

Staff had received training in a variety of subjects but supervisions had not been carried out often enough or in a timely way.

The systems that the service had in place to assess risk and monitor the quality and safety of the service were not effective.