You are here

Arshad Mahmood - 56-58 Carlton Road Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

This inspection was announced and took place on the 27 and 30 July 2018. This service is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or 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. Arshad Mahmood is registered to provide accommodation for up to four people living with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the home.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. We found that the service promoted these values. There was not a registered manager in post. This was because the registered provider managed the service and there was a small staff team providing care and support to people.

At our last inspection on 12 July 2016 we rated the service as ‘requires improvement’ in all key questions. This was because staff required further training and development in relation to safeguarding, the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We also found that quality assurance systems had not been used to identify shortfalls, develop action plans and drive improvement. At this inspection we found improvements had been made in relation to these areas.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and there were enough staff to meet their needs. Individual risks to people were assessed and staff knew how to minimise them. People were protected from risk of harm because staff knew how to spot signs of abuse and how to report concerns both within the organisation and externally from it. People received their medication as prescribed and staff were trained to give medication safely. The provider had a system in place to ensure safe recruitment.

People were supported by staff who had up to date training and the skills required to meet people’s needs. Staff sought consent from people before providing support and people were supported to make their own decisions. People were supported to meet their nutritional needs. People had access to the relevant professionals when required and people and relatives were kept up to date about any changes in people’s needs.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who knew their likes, dislikes, preferences and personal history. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and had goals in place to achieve with the support from staff. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained. People were communicated with in their preferred way. People were supported to meet their religious and cultural needs.

People were supported to engage in meaningful activities, both as a group and individually. People and relatives were informed of the complaints process and relatives we spoke with confirmed they knew how to complain. People and their relatives were involved in the review of their care and care plans and risk assessments were updated to reflect any changes to people’s needs.

There were quality assurance systems in place which had been analysed to identify areas for development and actions had been implemented. People and relatives feedback was sought on a regular basis and people were involved in the development of the service. Staff and relatives we spoke with told us the registered provider was approachable and supportive.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was safe.

People were safe from harm because staff had a good knowledge of what to do in the event of incident or allegation of abuse. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

Individual risks to people were assessed and minimised. People were supported to have their medication as prescribed.

People were protected from the risk of infection because the home was kept clean and tidy.

Effective

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.

People were given choices and staff sought consent before providing care and support to people.

People were encouraged to drink and eat sufficient amounts to meet their nutritional needs. People were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing and had access to health professionals when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who knew them well.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained. People were supported to communicate in their preferred way.

People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and had individual goals in place to work towards.

Responsive

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was responsive.

People and relatives were included in the assessment, planning and review of their care and support.

People were supported to engage in both group and individual activities.

People and relatives were informed of how to complain and a relative we spoke with told us they felt confident doing this.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was well-led.

The provider had made improvements to their quality monitoring systems.

People were encouraged to make decisions about the home and their input was used to drive improvement.

Relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered provider.