You are here

Archived: Community Options Limited - 4 Sandford Road Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 April 2015

This inspection was carried out on 25 March 2015 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 11 September 2013, we found the provider was meeting the regulations in relation to outcomes we inspected.

Community Options Limited - 4 Sandford Road is a residential care home which provides support for up to five adults with mental health needs. At the time of our inspection the home was providing care and support to four people.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

People using the service said they felt safe and that staff treated them well. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work. Staff had completed training specific to the needs of people using the service, for example, mental health awareness and the recovery star approach. Safeguarding adult’s procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported from abuse. The manager demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People using the service were had been fully involved in planning for their care needs. Risks to people were assessed and care plans and risk assessments provided clear information and guidance for staff on how to support people to meet their needs. People had jobs, attended colleges and gyms and enjoyed visiting the local area. People’s medicines were managed appropriately and people received their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.

Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible. There were regular meetings where people were able to talk about things that were important to them and about the things they wanted to do. People were aware of the complaints procedure and said they were confident their complaints would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

The provider sought the views of people using the service through annual surveys. The manager recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service provided to people. Staff said they enjoyed working at the home and they received good support from the manager. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available and staff said they would use it if they needed to.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 April 2015

The service was safe. There were safeguarding adult’s procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available and staff said they would use it if they needed to.

Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work. People using the service and staff told us there was always enough staff on shift.

People’s medicines were managed appropriately and people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 April 2015

The service was effective. Staff had completed an induction when they started work and received training relevant to the needs of people using the service.

The manager demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and acted according to this legislation.

People bought their own food and cooked for themselves. Their care files included assessments relating to their dietary needs and preferences.

People had access to a GP and other health care professionals when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 April 2015

The service was caring. Staff were caring and spoke to people using the service in a respectful and dignified manner. People were consulted about and involved in developing their care plans and recovery plans.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible.

There were regular residents’ meetings where people could talk about things that were important to them and about the things they wanted to do.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 April 2015

The service was responsive. People’s needs were assessed and care files included detailed information and guidance for staff about how their needs should be met.

People had jobs, attended colleges and gyms and enjoyed visiting the local area.

People knew about the homes complaints procedure and said they were confident their complaints would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 April 2015

The service was well-led. The provider took into account the views of people using the service through annual surveys.

The manager recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service provided to people using the service.

Staff said they enjoyed working at the home and they received good support from the manager.