You are here

Polesworth Group Friary Road Good

Reports


Review carried out on 7 January 2022

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Polesworth Group Friary Road on 7 January 2022. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Polesworth Group Friary Road, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 28 November 2018

During a routine inspection

We inspected this service on 28 November 2018.

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, 8 Friary Road, is one of eight services provided by Polesworth Group Homes Limited. The service provides accommodation with personal care for up to six adults living with a learning disability. 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 six people living at the home.

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, promoting of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live an ordinary life as any citizen.

There was a registered manager in post. They had been registered with us for this service and one other of the provider’s services. 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 May 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 safe, caring, effective and responsive to their needs. The rating continues to be Good.

This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At times, 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, and some shift staffing arrangements had recently been increased. The provider told us about their current recruitment to increase staffing.

Staff had the appropriate levels of skill, experience and support to meet people’s needs and provide effective care. Staff knew people well and individual risk management plans were in place for staff to follow. Newly identified risks of harm to people were acted upon by the registered manager.

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 raised concerns under the provider’s safeguarding policies. The registered manager and provider understood and followed their legal responsibilities when safeguarding concerns were identified to them by staff.

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 through healthy eating. 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 were able to take part in individual leisure activities according to their preferences.

Staff were happy in their job role and felt supported by the registered manager through team and individual meetings.

People had no complaints about the service. They felt the staff would deal with any concern if they needed to raise something.

The registered manager and provider 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 registered manager and provider understood their regulatory responsibilities and worked 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.

Inspection carried out on 12 May 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 12 May 2016 and was announced.

Friary Road provides care, support and accommodation for up to six people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection visit, there were six people living in the home.

The service was last inspected on 7 April 2014, when we found the provider was compliant with the essential standards described in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People were comfortable with the care staff who supported them. Relatives were confident people were safe living in the home. Staff received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and were supported by the provider’s safeguarding policies and procedures. Staff understood what action they should take to protect people from abuse. Risks to people’s safety were identified, minimised and responsive towards individual needs. People could be supported in the least restrictive way possible that helped promote and support their independence.

People were supported with their medicines if they needed it, by staff that were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines safely. Medicines were given in a timely way and as prescribed. Regular checks of medicines helped ensure any potential issues were identified and action could be taken as a result.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. The provider increased staffing levels when people’s needs changed so there were extra staff to meet those needs. The provider conducted pre-employment checks prior to staff starting work to ensure their suitability to support people who stayed at the home. Staff told us they had not been able to start work until these checks had been completed.

The provider assessed people’s capacity to make their own decisions if it was identified people lacked the capacity to make some or all of their own decisions. Staff and the registered manager had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, and the need to seek consent from people before delivering care and support wherever possible. Where restrictions on people’s liberty were in place, legal processes had been followed to ensure the restrictions were in people’s ‘best interests’. Applications for legal authorisation to restrict people’s liberty had been sent to the relevant authorities in a timely way.

People told us staff were respectful and treated them with dignity. We observed interactions between people which confirmed this. People told us their privacy and dignity was maintained and people were supported to make choices about their day to day lives. People were supported to maintain any activities, interests and relationships that were important to them.

People had access to health professionals whenever necessary, and we saw the care and support people received was in line with what had been recommended by health professionals. People’s care records were written in a way which helped staff to deliver care that was based on each person’s needs. People were involved in how their care and support was delivered, as were their relatives if people needed support from a representative to plan their care.

Relatives told us they were able to raise any concerns with the registered manager. They felt these would be listened to and responded to effectively and in a timely way. Staff told us the registered manager and the provider were approachable and responsive to their ideas and suggestions. There were systems to monitor the quality of the support provided in the home. The provider ensured that recommended actions from quality assurance checks were clearly documented and acted upon by the manager as they undertook regular unannounced visits to the home.

Inspection carried out on 10 April 2014

During a routine inspection

This service was inspected by one inspector who looked at five outcomes to answer the following 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 findings during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People we spoke with told us they were happy with the care and support provided by staff working for the service. They told us, "They look after me good" and "I love it here, it's nice."

Systems and processes were in place to ensure that the health, safety and welfare of people were maintained. Routine maintenance was undertaken at the expected intervals and records demonstrated that they were all up to date.

Is the service effective?

People had care and support plans in place which provided information for staff to be able to meet their needs effectively. Records demonstrated that people were involved in the development and review of their care and support needs.

The registered manager was aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and said that although this had not had to be used to date, it would be followed if it became necessary.

Is the service caring?

We met all of the people who lived in the home and spoke with three of them. People told us they liked their home and the staff team. People told us they were provided with the support they needed to be able to live the lifestyle they enjoyed. For example, one person said, "I help staff get the dinner ready and help with the chores. I do my own bedroom on a Thursday, and visit Mum once a fortnight." Other comments made included, "I'm going on holiday to Blackpool, I can't wait", "We go to a drama group which is fun" and "We're starting an eight day course to do woodwork soon."

Staff we spoke with told us they enjoyed their jobs. We saw they responded to people in a kind, caring and friendly manner.

Is the service responsive?

Systems and processes were in place to monitor and manage accidents, incidents and complaints. These clearly recorded the nature of the accident, incident or concern; the action taken and the steps followed to ensure that learning took place and any future occurrences were minimised.

People who used the service, staff, relatives and carers were asked for their views about the service provided. The responses received from people were analysed and used to make improvements to the service.

Is the service well led?

Processes and systems were in place to monitor the service provided. The provider used the information gathered through processes which included analyses of staff sickness levels and staff turn over, along with other quality systems to look for patterns that could be used to improve the quality of the service provided.

Inspection carried out on 14 May 2013

During a routine inspection

When we visited 8 Friary Road we met and spoke with two people who lived in the home, the home manager and two senior support workers.

People told us they enjoyed living in their home, and were happy there. We saw that people interacted positively with the staff on duty and appeared comfortable and relaxed in their surroundings. One person told us they liked the staff commenting, "I get on with all of them."

Care plans were in place for people. Staff told us that they provided information which helped them to support people with their needs. A staff member we spoke with knew about people's needs and was able to tell us about them.

We saw that people were being supported to lead active and varied lifestyles with a variety of outings and activities arranged.

We saw that processes were in place to ensure that medicines were managed appropriately for people.

We found that people's confidential information was stored securely.

Inspection carried out on 16 April 2012

During a routine inspection

When we visited Friary Road Care Home we spoke with four of the people who lived there, staff on duty and the registered manager.

We found that staff knew people as individuals and understood their personal needs and ways of communicating those needs. Staff treated people kindly and respectfully and included them in conversation, asking for their input. We saw that people were relaxed and at ease with staff and within their home environment.

We looked at the care planning documentation for two of the people using the service to see how their care was provided and managed. We talked with staff who demonstrated they were aware of people�s care and support needs. Staff said they were trained to help them understand how to meet people�s needs and give the support they needed.

The people we spoke with told us they enjoyed living at the home and got on well with each other and the staff. People said, �I�m very settled here, you can�t fault the staff,� and �I love it here.�

The provider regularly audited the service people received at Friary Road. This included questionnaires sent annually to the people who used the service, other interested parties and professionals as part of their monitoring process and review of the service provided.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)