The inspection took place on 14, 16 and 22 July 2015 and was announced. We announced the inspection to make sure that staff would be available at the office to assist us with the inspection. We contacted relatives following our inspection between 31 July and 3 August 2015.
Azure Charitable Enterprises provides support and a wide range of services to people with learning disabilities. They also work with people with a history of mental health issues, physical disabilities, those within the autistic spectrum and people who have an acquired head injury. The provider has four regulated services which are registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC); Hexham, Keele Drive, Newcastle and Azure Charitable Enterprises Washington.
We inspected Hexham, Keele Drive and Newcastle services between 14 and 22 July 2015. This report only relates to our findings at the Keele Drive inspection. Hexham and Newcastle reports can be found on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Azure Charitable Enterprises also have a number of supported businesses that provide employment and training opportunities for people with a disability. These include a garden centre and nurseries, a printing service, a landscaping business and a community enabling support service. These services are not regulated by the Care Quality Commission because they are out of scope of the regulations.
Keele Drive in Cramlington provides personal care to people who have a learning disability. The service comprises of a row of eleven houses, ten of which had four bedrooms and the other, two.
The houses were owned by a Housing Association which was not connected to the provider and a tenancy agreement was in place for people who lived there. Keele Drive provides staff to support people who lived in these houses. There were 39 people using the regulated “support service” at the time of the inspection. Not all people needed support with personal care.
The service was last inspected on 5 November 2013. We found they were meeting all the regulations we inspected.
There was a registered manager in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe. There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place. There was one ongoing safeguarding issue which was not connected to the care and support which staff provided. Staff knew what action to take if abuse was suspected.
People, staff and relatives told us there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. We observed staff provided support in a calm unhurried manner. There was a training programme in place. Staff were trained in safe working practices and to meet the specific needs of people who used the service. Many of the staff had worked at Keele Drive for a considerable number of years. This experience contributed to the skill which they carried out their duties.
There were systems in place for the safe management of medicines. Three staff checked the receipt of all medicines and two staff administered medicines.
People told us that they were happy with the service provided. We saw that people’s nutritional needs were met. People told us and our own observations confirmed that they were involved in the planning and preparation of meals.
The registered manager was aware of the Supreme Court judgement in relation to deprivation of liberty. The Supreme Court ruled that anyone who was subject to continuous supervision and not free to leave was deprived of their liberty. The registered manager told us that there was no one using the service that met the criteria mentioned above.
People and the relatives told us that staff were caring. People were supported to maintain their hobbies and interests and housekeeping skills were encouraged to help promote people’s independence.
People, relatives and staff told us that they were involved in making decisions about the running of the service. They explained that there was open communication and their views were listened to and acted upon. There was a complaints procedure in place.
There had been a number of external changes which had impacted upon the service. There had been a recent change in funding which had resulted in several staff redundancies. In addition, the housing provider which was not connected with Azure Charitable services had introduced a new concierge service which operated on a 24/7 basis. Concierge staff dealt with any tenancy related issues. Concierge staff now carried out some of the duties which Azure staff used to undertake such as house meetings and health and safety checks.
Staff informed us that they “loved” working for the provider and recognised that the changes and redundancies were not due to the provider but caused by changes in funding. They said that they still felt valued by the provider and were in the process of assessing the impact which the recent changes had on the service and people.
We reviewed a number of internal audits and monitoring reports which demonstrated that the provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service they delivered.