• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Sisserou

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

196 South Esk Raod, Forest Gate, London, E7 8HD (020) 8586 7812

Provided and run by:
Ms Theresa John

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 20 April 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 4 and 8 March 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location is a small care home and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection was conducted by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we already held about the service including statutory notifications. 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 but did not receive any feedback as they do not place people in the home.

During the inspection we spoke with two people who used the service, two care workers, and the registered provider. We observed how the staff interacted with people who used the service. We looked at two people's care files including support plans, risk assessments, reviews, monthly updates, health records and medicines records. We looked at three staff files, including recruitment records, training, supervision and appraisal. We viewed the staff duty rota, a range of audits and feedback, various meeting minutes, maintenance logs, incident and accident log, and policies and procedures for the home and other documents relevant to the management of the service.

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 20 April 2016

The inspection took place on 4 and 8 March and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice as it is a small care home and we needed to be sure that someone would be in. The service is a small care home for up to three people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection two people were living in the home. The home shares a staff team with another service run by the same provider in the local area. The service was last inspected in October 2013 when it was found to be compliant with the outcomes inspected.

The home did not have a registered manager in post, as the provider is an individual who is considered a 'registered person.' 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.

The home was not always applying the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff had not received specific training in this area and did not fully understand the principles behind it.

Risk assessments were not robust and care plans lacked detail on how support was provided. The knowledge of the staff supporting people was not captured in the documentation. This was brought to the attention of the registered provider who updated care plans and risk assessments to a good standard.

Records of care delivered were brief and task focussed. This meant that the service was not routinely capturing all the information about how people received support. We have made a recommendation about record keeping.

People were supported by trained staff to receive their medicines, however, records of medicines administered were not always clear. We have made a recommendation about recording medicines.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff employed by the service. Staff had been recruited safely with appropriate checks on their backgrounds completed.

Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults and knew how to protect people from harm. People told us they felt safe.

Staff received regular supervision and ongoing training to support them to develop the skills and knowledge required for their role.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to maintain a balanced diet. The service provided culturally appropriate food to meet people's needs and preferences.

People were supported to have their health needs met. Records showed people were supported to attend appointments with healthcare professionals when required. Any advice from healthcare professionals was shared so that staff knew how to support people to maintain their health.

Staff were caring and had built up strong relationships with people living in the home. Staff and people living in the home had a shared cultural heritage which meant that cultural and language needs were met. People were supported to attend religious services of their choice.

Care files were reviewed regularly and records showed that people were involved in making decisions about their care. Preserving people's dignity and respecting people's right to make choices were embedded in care plans.

The service had various feedback mechanisms, including formal complaints, house meetings and feedback surveys. This meant the service routinely listened to and learnt from people's experiences.

The home had a strong open, and person centred culture. Staff and people living in the service knew each other well and the home had a relaxed and homely feel.

People and staff spoke highly of the registered provider and described her as supportive.

The registered provider conducted appropriate audits and checks on the service to ensure it was delivering consistent, good quality care.