You are here

Archived: Meadoway Homes Limited - 613 Barking Road Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 13 April 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on the 13 and 21 April 2017 and was unannounced. At the previous inspection of this service in January 2015 we found one breach of Regulation 18 of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. This was because the provider had failed to notify the care Quality Commission of significant events. We found this issue had been addressed.

The service is registered to provide accommodation and support with personal care to up to five adults with mental health needs. Four people were using the service at the time of inspection. The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

There were enough staff working at the service to meet people’s needs and robust staff recruitment procedures were in place. Appropriate safeguarding procedures were in place. Risk assessments provided information about how to support people in a safe manner. Medicines were managed safely.

Staff received on-going training to support them in their role. People were able to make choices for themselves and the service operated within the principles of Mental Capacity Act 2005. People told us they enjoyed the food. People were supported to access relevant health care professionals.

People told us they were treated with respect and that staff were caring. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, independence and dignity.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs. Care plans were subject to regular review. People were supported to engage in various activities. The service had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make complaints.

Staff and people spoke positively about the registered manager. Systems were in place to seek the views of people on the running of the service.

Inspection carried out on 7 and 13 January 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place over two days on the 7 and 13 January 2015 and was unannounced. At the previous inspection of this service in February 2014 we found three breaches of regulations. At this inspection we found improvements had been made.

The service is registered to provide accommodation and support with personal care to up to five adults with mental health needs. Three people were using the service at the time of our inspection. There was a registered manager in place. 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.

We found one breach of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009 because they had not notified the Care Quality Commission of all significant events as required by legislation. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

Steps had been taken to promote people’s safety. Staff had undertaken safeguarding training and people told us they felt safe living at the service. People managed their own money which reduced the risk of financial abuse. There were enough staff working to keep people safe and risk assessments were in place. Medicines were safely administered.

Staff undertook various training and received supervision appropriate to their roles. People were able to make choices in line with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). MCA and DoLS are laws protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves or whom the state has decided their liberty needs to be deprived in their own best interests. People were able to choose and prepare their own food. People had access to health care professionals.

People were treated with respect and dignity by the service. The service met people’s needs with regard to equality and diversity issues.

People told us that the service met their needs and they were happy with the support provided. Care plans were in place and staff had a good understanding of how to support people. The service had a complaints procedure in place.

People and care staff told us they found senior staff to be approachable. Various quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place. People were consulted over the running of the service.

Inspection carried out on 11 February 2014

During a routine inspection

People we spoke to told us that they were involved in decisions about their care. We saw evidence that people had consented to care and support being provided. One person told us that they were helped by care workers with medication.

We reviewed care plans and records from sessions with key workers. We found that people�s preferences were considered by staff in the delivery of their care.

People were not cared for in a clean, hygienic environment and the premises was not being maintained.

We were not provided with evidence that staff were being supervised, appraised and monitored.

Inspection carried out on 7 March 2013

During a routine inspection

On the day of the inspection we reviewed four care plans. They were all using the provider's new format for documenting care which ensured it was regularly reviewed and monitored.

Two people we spoke to on the day of the inspection told us that they had recently had a review of their care plans and were shown what they had agreed and had signed it. The people we spoke to told us they knew where their care plan was and could easily have access to it if they wished.

The people we spoke to told us they were happy at the home and with the care. They also told us they preferred the new format of care plan as there was a lot more detail to record aspirations. We spoke to two family members and they said they were happy with the care provided.

We did inform the registered manager that there were some care plans where they had not been signed or dated by the keyworker which did not provide an accurate record as to when a goal was agreed with an individual.

Inspection carried out on 19, 24 September 2012

During a routine inspection

People who used the service were very positive about the service. They told us they made their own decisions and felt they were in control of their lives. People said they were involved in the planning of their care and happy with the support staff offered. From our discussions with staff we felt people were empowered to live as independently as they wished, whilst still having the security and guidance from a team of people that knew and understood their needs.

Although people told us that they were involved in the planning of their care, not all records showed evidence of regular review. This meant that care plans did not always reflect what people were working towards and the support they needed to achieve this.

Inspection carried out on 29 February 2012

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with voiced generally positive opinions about the service and the

support they receive. Comments included, �I have a lot of freedom here.� �I am getting all the help I want.� and �The best things about the home are freedom and feeling part of a community.�

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