Archived: Danemere

Updated 26 October 2016

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.

This inspection took place on 11 October 2016 and was announced. The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the information in the PIR and also looked at other information held about the service and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We also obtained the views of service commissioners from the local council who also monitor the service provided by the agency.

During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager and two staff members. We looked at documentation relating to the person who used the service, two staff recruitment and training records and records relating to the management of the service. After the inspection we spoke with one relative and contacted one health professional.

Updated 26 October 2016

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 11 October 2016.

Danemere is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for one adult with an acquired brain injury and associated learning disability.

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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Relatives were happy with the support arrangements provided. They told us their family member was safe and treated with respect. The person was cared for by an established, motivated and well trained staff team.

The person had their needs assessed and received care and support in accordance with their needs and wishes. They said they were able to make choices about their day to day life and were involved in decisions about their care and support.

There were procedures in place to help keep the person safe. These included a robust recruitment process and training for all staff to make sure they were able to work with vulnerable people and recognise and report any suspicions of abuse. The person told us they felt safe at the home.

New members of staff received an induction which included shadowing experienced staff before working independently. One member of staff said, “It was not just a case of shadowing a more experienced member of staff and then you got on with it. It was a case of shadowing a member of staff and then being shadowed to ensure we were competent”.

Staff received training to understand their role and to ensure the care and support provided to the person was person centred, meeting their individual needs. Staff received supervision and appraisals and told us they felt supported by the registered manager.

Staff monitored the person’s health and sought advice from healthcare professionals to meet their specific needs. The person had access to equipment to assist them to maintain their independence and ensure their comfort. The person was supported by a consistent staff team in a relaxed and unhurried manner.

The care plan provided information about how the person wished to be cared for and staff were aware of the person’s individual care needs. The person was able to take part in activities both at the home and in the local community. The home had access to a vehicle which enabled the person to get out and about on a regular basis.

Risks were assessed and appropriate control measures implemented in areas such as travelling, preparing meals, and having a presence in the community as well as relevant environmental risk assessments being carried out within the home.

Systems were in place to ensure the person received their medicines safely. All staff had received medicine administration training and had been assessed as competent before they were allowed to administer medicines.

Staff we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of the legal processes that protect people’s legal and human rights including decision making and consent .

As much as possible the person using the service was supported to make choices and decisions about daily life. Opportunities were taken to consult with them. Staff communicated in a respect manner, giving the person time to make choices and decisions. When the person had made their decision this was seen to be respected.

The service sought the views of the person and their relatives as appropriate to gauge their satisfaction and used the information to make improvements to the service. The registered manager and provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.