Background to this inspection
Updated
27 November 2018
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 comprehensive inspection took place on 30 October 2018 and was unannounced. Two inspectors and an expert by experience undertook the inspection. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service. The expert by experience on this inspection had experience of learning disabilities services.
Prior to our inspection visit, we reviewed the information we held about the service. We reviewed statutory notifications sent to us from the provider. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.
The provider completed a Provider Information Collection (PIC) during September 2018. This is information that we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.
We spent time with people and observing communal areas where people interacted with staff. This helped us judge whether people’s needs were appropriately met and to identify if people experienced good standards of care.
During the inspection we spoke all five people that lived at 64-66 Long Street. We spoke with one person’s relative, three care staff, the provider’s administrator and chief executive officer.
We reviewed two people’s care plans, daily records and medicine administration records. We also looked at the management records of the quality assurance audits the deputy, registered manager and provider made to assure themselves people received a safe, effective quality service.
Updated
27 November 2018
We inspected this service on 30 October 2018. The inspection was unannounced and carried out by two inspectors and an expert by experience.
The service is a ‘care home’ operated by Polesworth Group Homes; a non-profit and independent provider of support for people with learning disabilities. The service; 64-66 Long Street consists of two houses which have been converted into one house.
Long Street is one of eight services provided by Polesworth Group Homes Limited. The service provides accommodation with personal care for up to six adults. People in residential care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of our inspection visit, there were five people living at the home. The sixth bedroom is used as a staff room and there were no plans for more than five people to live at the service.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
There was a registered manager in post. They had been registered with us for this service since 2001. The registered manager was also registered with us to manage the provider’s supported living service and one other residential care home. 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.
At our last inspection in January 2016 we rated the service as Good. At this inspection, we found the quality of the care had been maintained and people continued to receive a service that was caring, effective and responsive to their needs. Whilst the safety of the service was, overall, maintained, some areas of risk management required improvements, and we therefore rated the safety of the service as ‘Requires Improvement’. The overall rating continues to be Good.
Staff were ‘lone workers’ at the service which meant there was just one staff member on shift. The provider’s other services were within close proximity to the service and staff felt they could call upon them, or on-call managers, for support if needed. The provider had recognised people’s care and support needs were changing, as people became older, and shared their future plans with us about staffing arrangements at the home.
Staff had the appropriate levels of skill, experience and support to meet people’s needs and provide effective care. Staff knew people well and, overall, individual risk management plans were in place for staff to follow. However, the provider needed to make some improvements to mitigate potential risks of harm or injury to people. Staff knew what action to take in the event of an emergency.
Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risks of abuse. Staff had received ‘safeguarding’ training and would raise concerns under the provider’s safeguarding policies. The provider checked staff’s suitability to deliver care and support during the recruitment process. Staff received training and used their skills, knowledge and experience to provide safe care to people.
People were encouraged and supported to maintain good health. Staff supported people to access healthcare services whenever needed. People received their prescribed medicines.
Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and worked within the principles of the Act. Managers understood their responsibilities under the Act and when ‘best interests’ meetings should take place.
Staff supported people with kindness and in a caring way.
People had individual plans of care which provided staff with the information they needed. People could take part in individual leisure activities according to their preferences.
Staff were happy in their job role and felt supported by the manager through team meetings and one to one supervision.
People had no complaints about the service. They felt the staff would deal with any concern if they needed to raise something.
The provider, registered and deputy manager checked the quality of the service to make sure people’s needs were met effectively. Feedback on a day to day basis from people was encouraged by staff. The provider and registered manager understood their regulatory responsibilities and with other organisations and healthcare professionals to ensure positive outcomes for people who lived at the home.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.