Southside Partnership - 94 Strathleven Road

Updated 18 April 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

One inspector was involved in carrying out this inspection.

Service and service type:

This service is a ‘care home’ where up to six adults with learning disabilities and/or autism, physical disabilities and communication needs receive accommodation and personal care.

The service had a manager registered with the CQC. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

Our inspection was unannounced on the first day and announced on the second day.

What we did:

Before our inspection, we reviewed all the key information we held about this service, including our Provider Information Return (PIR) and notifications the provider is required to send us by law about incidents and events involving people living in the care home and the service itself.

During our inspection we met with all six people who lived at the care home, a visiting relative and a community art therapist, the registered manager, the deputy manager, two senior area managers and five support workers. We also looked at a range of records including; three people’s care plans, six staff files and various documents relating to the overall management of the service. This included medicines administration record (MAR) sheets, accidents, incidents, complaints and quality assurance audits.

People living in the care home had complex communication needs and were not able to communicate their views to us through speech, so we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Updated 18 April 2019

About the service:

Southside Partnership - 94 Strathleven Road is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. A Housing Association (landlord) owned the building and as the landlord were responsible for its maintenance.

This service supported people with learning disabilities and/or autism, physical disabilities and communication needs. The care home was registered to care for six adults in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection six people were living at the care home.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensured people who lived at the service could live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

At this inspection the evidence we found continued to support the rating of ‘Good’ and there was no information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated any serious risks or concerns.

However, although we rated the service ‘Good’ overall and for four out of the five key questions, ‘Is the service safe, caring, responsive and well-led?’; we found the service was not always effective. Therefore, we have rated them ‘Requires Improvement’ for the one key question, ‘Is the service effective?’

Although the care home was suitably adapted and designed to meet the physical disability needs of people living there; we saw the interior decoration had not been well-maintained. This was confirmed by discussions we had with visitors to the care home and managers and staff who worked there.

This quote from a relative summed up how most people felt about the care home, “I think my [family member] receives some really good care from excellent staff who work at 94 Strathleven Road, but I just wish they [provider] would do the place up a bit.”

We discussed this issue with the registered manager. They told us they had repeatedly raised their concerns about the homes poor decorative state with the House Association. At this inspection we saw recorded evidence that showed the Housing Association had recently agreed to the providers requests to refurbish all the care homes damaged bathroom/toilets and kitchen, as well as redecorate all the communal areas, by June 2019.

Progress made by the provider in partnership with the housing Association to achieve this time specific aim will be assessed at their next inspection.

The premises issues described above notwithstanding, people seemed happy at the care home. We observed good interactions between people living there and staff throughout our two-day inspection.

The service had appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. Risks to people had been assessed and was regularly reviewed to ensure people’s needs were safely met. This meant people were protected from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse.

Appropriate staff recruitment checks took place before staff started working for the service. There were enough staff available to meet people’s care and support needs. People received care from staff who were suitably trained and supported to meet their personal care and support needs.

The service had procedures in place to keep the care home clean and reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

People were receiving their medicines as prescribed. Medicines were monitored and safely managed in line with best practice guidance.

Staff routinely sought the consent of the people they supported ensuring they had maximum choice and control of their lives. People were supported to do as much as they could and wanted to do for themselves to help them maintain and develop their independent living skills.

People were supported to maintain a nutritionally balanced diet. People received the support they needed to stay healthy and to access health care services as and when required.

People received support from staff who were kind and compassionate. Staff treated people they supported with dignity and respect. Staff also ensured people's privacy was always maintained, particularly when they supported people with their personal care needs.

Staff understood people’s preferred method of communication and acted on their wishes.

Staff met people’s spiritual and cultural needs and wishes. Staff understood people’s preferred method of communication and acted on their requests.

People’s care plans were personalised and routinely reviewed to ensure they remained up to date.

People were supported to participate in activities within the care home and in the wider community that reflected their social interests.

No one living in the care home at the time of our inspection required support with end of life care, however there were procedures in place to make sure people had access to this type of care if it was required.

The service was well-led and management support was always available for staff when they needed it. There was an open and transparent and person-centred culture.

The provider had effective systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the care and support people living in the care home received. Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

People, their relatives, professional health and social care representatives and staff were all asked to share their feedback about the service and action was taken in response to this feedback. People, and where appropriate their relatives and professional representatives, were supported to express their views and be involved in making decisions about the care and support they received.

People's concerns and complaints were dealt with by the provider in an appropriate and timely way.

The provider worked in close partnership with other health and social care professionals and agencies to plan and deliver an effective care home service.

Rating at the last inspection:

Good overall and for all five key questions, ‘Is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?’ (Report was published on 09 November 2016).

Why we inspected:

This unannounced comprehensive inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

All services rated "Good" overall are re-inspected by the CQC within two and a half years of the published date of our last planned comprehensive inspection.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people receive safe, compassionate, high quality care. Further inspections will be planned for future dates in keeping with our inspection methodology (See above).

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk