Background to this inspection
Updated
19 February 2015
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.
The inspection took place on 19 January 2015 and was unannounced. As the service was small the inspection team consisted of just one inspector. We started our inspection early in the morning as the service provides support to younger adults who are often out during the day; we needed to be sure that someone would be in.
Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. Providers are required by law to notify us about events and incidents that occur; we refer to these as notifications. No incidents had occurred that required a notification at the time of our inspection. The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about their service, how it is meeting the five questions, and what improvements they plan to make. We used the information we had gathered to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection.
On the day of our inspection we met and spoke with one person who lived there (the second person was not there at that time as they had left the home early to go to their day centre). Later in the day we spoke to the second person by telephone. We spoke with one staff member and briefly to the provider/registered manager by telephone. Prior to and following our inspection we spoke with two local authority staff who were involved in monitoring the care and safety of the people who lived there. Although we tried, because of their personal circumstances, we were not able to contact or get the views of the relatives of the people who lived there. We spent time in communal areas observing routines and the interactions between staff and the people who lived there. We looked at the care and medication records for the two people, recruitment and training records for two staff and accident records.
Updated
19 February 2015
The provider is registered to accommodate and deliver personal care to a maximum of three people.
Our inspection was unannounced. It took place on 19 January 2015.
At our last inspection in October 2013 the provider was meeting all of the regulations that we assessed.
The provider was also the 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.
We found that the provider/registered manager due to personal circumstances of late had only limited involvement with the running of the service. We found that the people who lived there were safe. However, due to the provider/registered manager’s absence the service was not consistently run in the way it should be to meet regulations. We found that there was a lack of staff supervision and day to day monitoring of the service. The local authority were aware of this and were monitoring the situation to ensure that people continued to be cared for and kept safe.
We were informed by the local authority that changes were pending. They had reassessed the two people who lived there and determined that they no longer needed the level of support that they were presently funding.
Overall, medicine was managed safely. However, there was a lack of recording systems to confirm that medicine was stored at the correct temperature.
People told us that they felt safe. We saw that there were systems in place to protect people from the risk of abuse.
People told us that they liked the food and drink that they were offered. Records confirmed that the people who lived there were supported to have a varied diet in sufficient quantities.
Staff numbers and experience ensured that people were safe and that their needs were met in the way that they wanted them to be.
People told us that the staff were nice and kind and we saw that they were. We observed that interactions between staff and the people who lived there were positive in that staff were kind, polite and helpful to people.
We found that that people received care in line with their best interests. Staff gave us an account of what Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS) meant and what they should do if they identified any concerns.
Staff had training to equip them with the knowledge to provide appropriate support to the people who lived there.
We found that a complaints system was available for people to use. This meant that people and their relatives could state their concerns and dissatisfaction and that issues would be looked into.