Archived: St Catherine's

The service was providing care for one person and we spoke with the person as part of this inspection. We also spoke with a relative, the registered manager, the responsible person and two care staff. We reviewed records relating to the management of the service which included one care plan, daily care records, and records relating to staff. We also looked at procedures relating to the monitoring of the quality of the service provided.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what the person using the service, their relative and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

Is the service safe?

We found the service had systems in place to ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults. We spoke with staff who were clear about what constituted abuse and the action they would take if they suspected this.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. The manager was aware of the safeguards and how they were applied. They told us the safeguards would not apply to anyone using the service. Staff were aware of people's rights to make choices and people were supported to be involved in their care.

Is the service effective?

The care plan in place was comprehensive, covering all aspects of the person's life. Details were documented about the tasks the person could carry out independently and those which they needed assistance with. Clear targets were set, with full involvement of the person, and these were discussed with staff regularly. Staff were knowledgeable about the person's needs and how to support them effectively. The person we spoke with said they were happy with the support they received and that they had achieved considerable independence as a result.

Is the service caring?

Staff we spoke with had developed a good relationship with the person they supported. The person was relaxed with the member of staff and told us they were 'happy' with the way support was provided. A relative told us, '[my relative] is very happy with both [staff]'. Both staff described how they provided support ensuring the person's human rights were respected. One staff said, 'We are there to support, not force'.

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive to people's changing needs and took appropriate actions. Records showed the level of support the person needed had decreased over time and the service had responded to this. They had taken into account feedback from the person and their relative. They had regular opportunities to give feedback and told us they would 'just tell [the manager]' if they were not happy about anything.

Is the service well-led?

Quality assurance measures were in place which included staff supervision and regular meetings with the person using the service. Clear targets were set for the person's maintenance and development of independence and these were reviewed regularly.

A complaints policy was in place and the person receiving the service was aware of how to make a complaint should they need to.

Regular update meetings were held with staff and they told us they had access to support and advice at all times.