Archived: Cliffe House

Updated 16 June 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 18 March 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one 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 contacted the local authority who had funding responsibility for people who were using the service. We looked at information that we had received about the service and used this to inform our inspection planning.

We spoke with two people that used the service and observed support that they received. We spoke with the registered manager and manager of the service and two members of care staff. We looked at the care records of the two people that used the service. We looked at documentation about how the service was managed. This included policies and procedures, two staff records and records associated with quality assurance processes.

Updated 16 June 2016

The inspection took place on 18 March 2016 and was unannounced.

Cliffe House is registered to provide accommodation for up to three people who require personal care and support. At the time of our inspection two people were using the service.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

People felt safe at the service and knew who to tell if they had any concerns. Staff knew how to identify any possible signs of abuse.

People's care needs had been assessed. Risks associated with people's care and support had been identified and control measures had been put in place.

People were supported to access appropriate healthcare professionals. Relevant healthcare professionals had been contacted in relation to incidents and accidents that had occurred. They had not been referred through to the local authority safeguarding team for their consideration.

There were systems in place to support the safe management of medicines. Records did not always accurately reflect the amount of medicines in stock.

Staff felt well supported within their roles and received appropriate training and supervision to enable them to meet people's needs.

Where there was a concern around a person’s capacity to consent in relation to a particular area of their care and support then it had been identified. However, where a best interest decision had then been made there was no information about how this decision had been reached.

Staff knew and understood people that used the service well. People's independence was promoted and people's privacy and dignity was respected.

People were supported to follow their hobbies and interests. People were encouraged and supported to attend a variety of social events.

The service aimed to provide a secure and caring environment where people were able to live and participate in the community. This was clearly set out in the statement of purpose and reflected by the care that was provided.