You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 24 June 2014
Date of Publication: 19 July 2014
Inspection Report published 19 July 2014 PDF


Inspection carried out on 24 June 2014

During a routine inspection

A single inspector carried out this inspection. We talked with four people who used the service and observed how people were being cared for. We spoke with the registered manager and three members of staff. We looked at the care and support records of four people who used the service and the records of staff training and quality audits.

This helped us to answer the questions below.

Is the service safe?

People�s care records contained risk assessments and action plans to ensure the care provided was safe and appropriate for their needs. Support plans were reviewed in conjunction with the people who used the service, to ensure care was provided in accordance with their wishes.

Safeguards were in place to ensure that when people lacked the ability to make decisions about their care and treatment, mental capacity assessments were carried out and action taken to ensure best interest decisions were made. Staff had undertaken training in adult safeguarding, the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and understood the implications of these for their practice.

Safe systems were in place for the management of people�s medicines and staff had completed training and competency assessment in medicines administration to ensure their knowledge and skills were up to date.

Is the service effective?

Full assessments of each person�s support needs were undertaken and support plans were reviewed regularly and updated as necessary to ensure the support provided was appropriate to each person�s individual needs.

An advocacy service was available for people if they needed it and information was provided in easy read format to enable people to understand how an advocate could provide them with additional support. There was a range of other information provided in accessible formats within the home to enable people to raise concerns and ensure their voices were heard.

We saw there was involvement from a range of professionals in each person�s care, ensuring care was effective and specialist input obtained where necessary.

There was a structured approach to training and appraisal of staff to ensure staff were supported to function effectively in their job roles.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service were happy with the care and support provided. They told us staff were kind and protected their privacy during care activities. We saw staff encouraging people to express their views and taking time to make sure they understood their wishes.

People�s preferences, interests, and diverse needs were recorded and care and support was provided in accordance with their wishes.

People were encouraged to participate in activities they enjoyed thus promoting their well-being.

Is the service responsive?

People were engaged in a wide range of activities in the local community and when they identified a change in their preferences this was listened to and alternatives explored with them.

Feedback was sought from people who used the service and we saw a number of examples of improvements which had been implemented as a result of this feedback.

People told us they had had no reason to complain but they knew how to make a complaint if necessary and who to contact if they were not satisfied with the response. However, they told us they were confident their concerns would be dealt with by the staff and manager.

Is the service well led?

Systems were in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service and records showed that quality audits had been carried out regularly. Issues for improvement identified from the audits had been acted on.

There was a planned approach to education and training and staff had received the training they required to deliver safe and effective care. Staff received regular supervision and appraisal. They told us they felt well supported by the manager and encouraged to undertake further development.

Key areas we looked at such as medicines management were supported by policies and procedures which identified the standards and practices expected.