Background to this inspection
Updated
13 December 2018
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 comprehensive inspection took place on 20 November 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice as people living in the home often went out for the day and we wanted to ensure people and staff were at the home for part our visit. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.
When planning our inspection, we looked at information we held about the service. This included notifications received from the provider about deaths, accidents/incidents and safeguarding alerts which they are required to send us by law. Before the inspection, 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 also contacted the local authority commissioners of people’s care who purchase the care on behalf of people to ask them for information about the service.
During our inspection we met with three of the people living at Arshad Mahmood. Some people were not able to tell us what they thought of living at the home. Therefore, we used different methods to gather experiences of what it was like to live at the home. For example, we saw how staff supported some people throughout the inspection to help us understand peoples’ experiences of living at the home.
We spoke with the deputy manager and two staff. We also spoke with two relatives by telephone. We looked at a range of records. This included two people’s care plans, two people’s medicine records, two staff recruitment records and quality assurance systems that were in place.
Updated
13 December 2018
Arshad Mahmood is a ‘care home’ for four people with learning disabilities and/or autism. There were four people living in the home when we visited. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The registered provider manages the service with care provided by a small team of staff. 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 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.
At our last inspection on 19 August 2016 we rated the service as overall ‘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.
People continued to receive a safe service. We saw that people looked happy being with the staff who were supporting them and there were enough staff on duty to allow staff to spend time with people. People received their prescribed medication at the right time and medication was stored and checked safely. Staff knew how to report concerns and the risks related to people’s needs.
People continued to receive an effective service. Staff received training that was relevant to their role and enabled them to provide effective support. People’s health needs were monitored closely by staff and staff supported people to access healthcare appointments when required. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed and people were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives.
People continued to receive care from staff who were kind, respectful and compassionate. Staff worked hard to develop people’s independence and helped people to make real progress in daily living skills. People were supported to maintain contact with families through the use of technology and through visits.
People continued to receive a responsive service. People’s needs were assessed and considered carefully before they came to live in the home to ensure they were well placed. People had access to activities which they enjoyed and had the opportunity to express their preferences for trips and holidays. Relatives told us they were involved in reviews of people’s care and were kept informed of any changes.
Improvements had been made and the service is now consistently well-led. Staff, relatives and professionals were happy with the way the service was led by the provider. There was a family atmosphere and the provider supported people, staff and relatives to receive the care they each required.. The provider had notified us of any incidents and changes as required and audits were effective in highlighting any gaps in the service.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.