Archived: Napier Unit

We looked at five sets of records for people who used the service, staff's training records and records that related to measures that were planned in case of emergencies. We spoke with the manager, three members of staff and three people who used the service.

During this inspection, we considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcome we inspected. We used the information to answer our five key questions; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people using the service and the staff told us. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

CQC monitors the operation of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to residential homes. We spoke with the manager and they demonstrated their knowledge of the procedures to follow if an application needed to be made to deprive a person of their liberty. We found that procedures were in place for contacting the appropriate office in order to submit an application to deprive people of liberty in their best interest. The manager confirmed that no one was subject to a deprivation of their liberty at the time of our inspection. Risk assessments with clear action plans were in place to ensure people remained safe. Emergencies measures were in place and people who lived in the service had personal evacuation plans.

Is the service effective?

People were attended at all times and their needs were met without delay. Two people who used the service told us, 'I like coming here, people are my friends' and 'I am always busy when I come here, I like it'.

Is the service caring?

We found that the staff provided support to people who used the service in a caring and gentle manner. We observed people who used the service interacting with the staff in the lounge and noted the staff communicated well with appropriate humour and professionalism. A member of staff told us, 'We get to know them well and ensure they have a good time when they come here'.

Is the service responsive?

We found that people's care plans were updated to reflect their changes in needs. Each care plan was reviewed by the manager before people returned to the service. People's representatives were contacted to check whether there had been any changes in people's needs and care plans were updated to reflect changes.

Is the service well-led?

The manager consulted with people who used the service and all staff on duty on a daily basis. All the members of staff we spoke with told us there was an open door policy and that they were encouraged to voice any concerns they may have. One told us, "We are listened to". The manager took prompt action to set up systems that ensure emergency measures were in place in case of emergencies. Feedback about measures that were in place had been sought from staff by the manager at team meetings.

Following our inspection we contacted four representatives of people who used the service and gathered their feedback. We looked at five sets of records for people who used the service, seven personnel files, staff training records, the service's satisfaction surveys, policies and procedures. During this inspection, the inspector focused on answering five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what the staff and people' representatives told us.

- Is the service safe?

We found that people who used the service were cared for in a safe environment. We saw that all staff were trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults and that the training included the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. All staff had been subject to Disclosure and Barring Services (DBS) checks before they started work. We found risk assessments with clear action plans were in place to ensure people remained safe. CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to residential care settings. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. The deputy manager told us, "We are well aware of the procedures to follow but we have not had cause to submit an application to the DolS office not have we had to use restraint". People's records were kept securely and disposed of according to legal requirements.

- Is the service effective?

We observed that people were welcomed and cared for appropriately when they returned from their day centre. We saw that their needs were met without delay. A member of staff told us, "When they come back they are often tired and need gentle handling, it is important to make them smile and relax". People's representatives and relatives told us they were very satisfied with the quality of care that people received during their respite break. They told us,"This is a home from home, my son loves going there" and, "These periods of respite are invaluable and enable us to cope". We saw that the delivery of care was in line with people's care plans and assessed needs. We found that the staff had received training to meet the needs of people who used the service.

- Is the service caring?

We found that people who used the service were supported by kind and attentive staff. A member of staff told us, "It is important to make people smile and relax". Another member of staff commented, "I love this job, caring for people who come here for a much needed break is really rewarding". A relative of a person who used the service said, "The care cannot be faulted, it is simply excellent and fully matches my son's needs, the staff do exactly what is planned and go the extra mile to make him happy". Another representative said, "The quality of care is excellent".

- Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before people entered the service and their support plans were updated from the first day they started their respite break. Care plans were reviewed to reflect any change in people's needs. We saw that people's care plans included people's wishes and preferences and that these were respected in practice. People and/or their representatives were involved with reviews of care plans and they were kept informed of any changes. People's views were sought about the quality of care that they received and their views were taken into account.

- Is the service well-led?

We found that comprehensive policies and procedures were in place that addressed every aspect of the service. Policies were updated regularly and staff were made aware of the updates. The manager operated a system of quality assurance to identify how to improve the service. People and their relatives or representatives were consulted about how the service was run and feedback and annual survey questionnaires were analysed. The deputy manager told us, "We pay attention to any feedback we receive and see what can be improved". Staff told us they were encouraged to express their views and they were listened to if they had any concerns. A member of staff told us, "We can just go in the office and speak to the managers, they always listen and value our opinion". Comments about the service's management included, "The manager is a great manager who will do her best to always help you", and, "The manager and her staff are all most professional".