You are here

Archived: Stickley Lane Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 4 December 2019

During a routine inspection

Stickley Lane is a care home providing personal care to six people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection six people lived at the service. The accommodation is provided in one adapted building with bedrooms on the ground and first floor.

The service had been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties and larger than those in the area. It was registered for the support of up to six people. Six people were using the service. This is in line with current best practice guidance. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People did not always receive safe care. Where safeguarding concerns arose, these were not consistently identified and referred to the appropriate body. Whilst some checks to ensure staff were competent to administer medicines had been recorded this was not consistent. Staff had been recruited safely and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Personal protective equipment was used when required.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to do so effectively and the service worked with relevant healthcare professionals when appropriate. People received support to eat and drink meals of their choosing and specialist dietary needs were met.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not always support this practice. Mental capacity decisions were recorded but the evidence of how these decisions had been assessed and how people were included was not.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who respected their privacy and dignity and supported their independence.

Records held personalised information about people and staff knew people's preferences with regards to their care. People were supported to access the community on a regular basis and carry out activities

in line with their hobbies and interests. The provider had a complaints process to share any concerns.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People, relatives and staff felt the management team were approachable and supportive. Whilst some audits and checks were in place at the service further improvements were required in order to make them more robust. There had been a failure to notify CQC of all incidents that had happened at the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 02 June 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement

We have identified breaches in relation to governance, safeguarding and in the provider’s failure to notify the commission of allegations of abuse.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report

Inspection carried out on 12 April 2017

During a routine inspection

Stickley Lane provides support for up to six people with a learning disability, autistic spectrum disorder, physical disability and or sensory impairment. At the time of our inspection there were six people living in the home. At the last inspection, in December 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

People continued to receive support that was safe and staff knew how to keep them safe. There were still enough staff to keep people safe and people received the medicines as it was prescribed for them.

The support people received continued to be effective. People made decisions as to how they were supported. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. Staff were supported so they had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.

People continued to receive care that was good. People were supported by staff to make choices as to how the service met their needs. People’s privacy, dignity and independence was respected.

The service continued to be responsive to how people’s needs were met. People were involved in how decisions were made about the support they received and any reviews that took place. People knew how to raise complaints if they had any concerns about the service they received.

The service continued to be well led. The provider ensured the appropriate checks and audits took place to ensure the quality of the service was maintained. People were encouraged to share their views on the service by way of completing questionnaires. The provider ensured people received a service that was warm and welcoming to them.

Inspection carried out on 5 and 8 December 2014

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on the 5 and 8 December 2014 and was unannounced so no one knew we would be inspecting that day. At our last inspection on the 22 July 2013 the regulations inspected were met.

Stickley Lane is registered to provide accommodation and support for six people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder, physical disability and sensory impairment. There was a registered manager in post at the 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.

We found from our observations that people who lived within the home were safe. The atmosphere in the home was one of people living in a relaxed and harmonious environment. People we were able to speak with confirmed they felt safe and liked living in the home. The staff we observed and spoke with knew how to support people, communicate with them and make them feel at ease. People who were unable to speak with us showed how happy and relaxed they were by their body language and facial expressions.

Records showed that staff had the training to be able to keep people safe. Some staff needed refresher training but this did not distract from them having the skills and knowledge to know what to do to keep people safe from harm.

Relatives, staff and people we spoke with told us there was always enough staff and our observations on the day were that there were enough trained and experienced staff. Rotas we looked at regarding night staff confirmed that there were enough staff to support and look after people.

We found that people had not been prescribed a vast number of medicines but what was being administered was being done by staff following an appropriate procedure. Staff would not administer medicines unless they had received the appropriate training and there would always be a second member of staff to give an extra safety check to what was being administered.

People were able to make choices in all aspects of their daily lives. We observed people being asked to make choices in the meals they had, whether they wanted hot or cold drinks and one person told us they went to bed and got up when they wanted. Food menus were available in a format people could understand, and they were involved in deciding the content of the menus.

We found that people who lived within the home were able to communicate in their own way, but relied on staff support in ensuring the decisions they made were in their best interest. The staff we spoke with understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and had limited understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). As a result of this the manager was due to attend further training to update their knowledge on the recent changes implemented as to when a DoLS application should be made to a ‘supervisory body’ for authority to deprive someone of their liberty.

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were being respected by staff. We saw staff consistently checking with people before entering their bedroom and where people needed support for personal care this was done respectfully.

Records showed that people’s preferences and hobbies were recorded as part of the care planning process and staff knew what people liked to do. Our observations were that people were able to take part in their interests and hobbies as well as group activities. For example, being able to go out of the home shopping individually, going to the cinema or just taking part in arts and crafts or other stimulating activities within the home. Staff were also observed proactively talking to people in the lounge in meaningful discussion as part of offering mental stimulation to people.

Relatives we spoke with told us they knew how to complain. They told us that they were given a copy of the complaints process but had never had cause to use it. We saw that the provider had been proactive in ensuring people knew how to communicate concerns to staff if they were unhappy.

We found that the service was well led and relatives and people we spoke with confirmed this. The staff we spoke with told us they were able to access support when needed and the registered manager had systems in place to ensure staff were supported when needed. We found that management systems were in place so people had the support they needed in an environment that was relaxed, friendly and homely.

Inspection carried out on 22 July 2013

During a routine inspection

During this inspection, we spoke with four people, one relative, three staff members, one visitor and the home manager.

People�s care was planned in detail and delivered in a person centred way. People at the home were happy and comfortable. One person said, �It is nice here.�

People received appropriate nutrition that met their individual needs. We found that the planning and delivery of people�s requirements related to food and fluid intake were effective.

We found that selection and recruitment processes were robust to ensure that only suitable staff were employed to work with people. We asked one person what the staff were like. They said, �They are nice.�

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of service provided. People and their relatives had different opportunities to provide their views on the service.

Inspection carried out on 6 December 2012

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection to check on the care and welfare of people. There were six people living at the home on the day of the inspection. We spoke with three people, two staff, and the home manager.

We saw that people were well presented and wore clothes that reflected their own preferences, style, and gender. We found that people were asked for their consent before care was delivered.

We found that staff were aware of people�s needs and preferences. People received care from other health professionals in a timely manner. One person said, �I like it here.�

Arrangements were in place to ensure that people received their medicines as prescribed, and in a safe manner.

We found that there were enough staff to look after people on the day of the inspection. Training records showed that staff had access to different training to improve their skills and knowledge.

Systems were in place to ensure that people could complain, and complaints were taken seriously. One person said, �No complaint, it�s good here.�

Inspection carried out on 27 March 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with five people who lived in the home and spent time observing how staff supported them. We spoke with the manager and with three staff.

We saw that the home was clean and tidy and the atmosphere was relaxed and friendly.

People told us about choices they had made about what they did and how staff supported them. We saw that staff were knowledgeable about people's requirements and how they wanted to be supported.

We saw that people were involved in decisions about their own care and in decisions about the environment in which they lived.

We saw that care plans were comprehensive and helped staff know how to provide the necessary care and support to individuals.

Staff showed us that they knew how to safeguard people from harm.

Staff told us that they have regular training and felt supported to provide appropriate care. We saw that staff supported people in a positive way promoting their independence and well being.

People told us that they knew how to complain and that they would be listened to. One person told us, "If I am not happy I tell the staff."

Another person told us, "I like it here. I have my own bedroom upstairs."

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