Background to this inspection
Updated
12 February 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 checked 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 unannounced inspection took place on 28 and 29 January 2016. The inspection was undertaken by one adult social care inspector.
Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports, information and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.
During the inspection we met and spoke with six people who were using the service and five ex residents who visited the service during the inspection. We spoke with the registered manager, three therapists (staff), a volunteer and the two cooks. We observed the care people received, observed a therapy group, and pathway tracked three people. Pathway tracking is where we follow a person’s route through the service and capture information about how they receive care and treatment. We also looked around the premises and observed how staff interacted with people throughout the day.
We looked at three records related to people’s individual care needs and people’s records related to the administration of their medicines. We discussed staff recruitment processes with the registered manager, staff training, supervision and looked at records associated with the management of the service including quality assurance audits and minutes of residents’ meetings.
Updated
12 February 2016
The inspection took place on the 28 and 29 January 2016 and was unannounced.
Weymouth Aftercare Centre is a residential care home providing treatment, rehabilitation and support for up to 15 people affected by substance misuse issues. On the day of the inspection 6 people were using the service.
The service had 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.
During the inspection people and staff were relaxed; the environment was clean and clutter free. There was a calm and pleasant atmosphere. People confirmed staff were caring and kind to them.
Care records were focused on people’s goals for their recovery. People were involved in planning their needs, the areas they identified they needed support with and how they would like to be supported. People preferences were sought and respected. People’s life histories were taken into account, communicated and recorded, so staff provided consistent personalised care, treatment and support.
People’s risks were known, monitored and managed well. There was an open, transparent culture and good communication within the staff team. Accidents and incidents were recorded and managed promptly. Staff knew how to respond in a fire and emergency situation. There were some quality assurance systems in place. Incidents related to people’s behaviour were appropriately recorded and discussed amongst the team to understand possible triggers and reduce the likelihood of a reoccurrence.
People were encouraged to live active lives and were supported to participate in community life where possible. People committed to participating in the in house treatment programme. The treatment programme was based on the 12 step AA model for treating alcohol abuse and addiction. During the week there were meditation groups, group therapy, one to one therapy and relapse prevention groups.
People had their medicines managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed, received them on time and understood what they were for. People were supported to maintain good health through regular visits with healthcare professionals, such as GPs and dentists and the specialists involved in people’s specific health care needs.
People and staff were encouraged to be involved in meetings held at the home to help drive continuous improvement such as residents’ meetings and staff meetings. Listening to feedback on a daily basis helped ensure positive progress was made in the delivery of care and support provided by the service.
People knew how to raise concerns and make complaints but told us they didn’t have any. People explained there was an open door policy and staff always listened and were approachable. The registered manager informed us if any complaints were made they would be thoroughly investigated and recorded in line with the service’s policy.
People told us they felt safe and secure. There were house rules which helped to keep people safe. For example, no alcohol or drug use.
Staff understood their role with regards ensuring people’s human rights and legal rights were respected. All the people who were being supported at Weymouth Aftercare Centre had capacity and consented to their care and treatment but staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The service made great efforts to ensure people’s human rights and liberty were respected. All staff had undertaken training on safeguarding adults from abuse; they displayed good knowledge on how to report any concerns and described what action they would take to protect people against harm.
Staff in post had previously received treatment at the service and knew the service well. There was a brief induction programme covering essential training. We spoke with the registered manager about implementing the Care Certificate (a new health and social care staff induction programme). There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Staff were passionate about their work; they were empathic, kind, caring and thoughtful. Staff ensured people mattered, cared for people’s families and relatives and supported people to reconnect with family where possible. Staff were appropriately trained, had experience of addiction and had the correct skills to carry out their roles effectively.
Staff described the management as open, very supportive and hands on. Staff felt like part of a large family and talked positively about their jobs and the positive contribution they made to people’s recovery.