You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 August 2018

This unannounced inspection was undertaken on 12 June 2018 and was carried out by one inspector. At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Number Residential Care Home is a ‘care home’ for people who have mental health needs and who may also have additional disabilities. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service accommodates a maximum of 10 people. At the time of our inspection there were 10 women living in the home. Most of the people using the service had been living at the home for many years. Most of the staff team had also been working at the home for some time and everyone knew each other well.

Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from potential abuse, bullying or discrimination. Staff knew what to look out for that might indicate a person was being abused. People using the service were relaxed with staff and the way staff interacted with people had a positive effect on their well-being.

Risks had been recorded in people’s care plans and ways to reduce these risks had been explored and were being followed appropriately.

There were systems in place to ensure medicines were handled and stored securely and administered to people safely and appropriately.

Staff were positive about working at the home and told us they appreciated the support and encouragement they received from the manager and deputy manager.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA 2005) and knew that they must offer as much choice to people as possible in making day to day decisions about their care.

We have made a recommendation relating to notifying the Commission about certain changes, events and incidents that affect services or the people who use it.

People were included in making choices about what they wanted to eat and staff understood and followed people’s nutritional plans in respect of any cultural requirements or healthcare needs people had.

Both people who used the service and the staff who supported them had regular opportunities to comment on service provision and made suggestions regarding quality improvements.

All parts of the home, including the kitchen, were clean and no malodours were detected.

People had regular access to healthcare professionals such as doctors, dentists, chiropodists and opticians.

Staff treated people as unique individuals who had different likes, dislikes, needs and preferences. Staff and management made sure no one was disadvantaged because of their age, gender, sexual orientation, disability or culture. Staff understood the importance of upholding and respecting people’s diversity. Staff challenged discriminatory practice.

Everyone had an individual plan of care which was reviewed on a regular basis.

People were supported to raise any concerns or complaints and staff understood the different ways people expressed their views about the service and if they were happy with their care.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 August 2018

The service continued to be safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 August 2018

The service continued to be effective.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 August 2018

The service continued to be caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 August 2018

The service continued to be responsive.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 14 August 2018

The service was not always well-led. Notifications about certain changes, events and incidents that affect their service or the people who use it were not always being sent to the Commission.

Both people who used the service and the staff who supported them had regular opportunities to comment on service provision and made suggestions regarding quality improvements.

Quality assurance arrangements identified current and potential concerns and areas for improvement.