Archived: Six Acres

We asked the following five questions.

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well led?

Is the service safe?

People using the service were not safe. Staff had started working for the service before all recruitment checks had been completed and had been shown to be satisfactory. This meant the service was not able to demonstrate that staff had been appropriately recruited or that they were suitably skilled and experienced to support people who used the service. This could place people at risk of harm.

Is the service effective?

The service was not effective. Mental capacity assessments had not always been undertaken when needed for people living at Six Acres. Clear information had not been provided to people in relation to the fees they were paying to the service.

Is the service caring?

People told us the staff were caring. We observed caring and supportive interactions between staff and the people they supported. Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

Relatives were encouraged to express their views about their care and support. The registered manager contacted relatives regularly and asked them to feedback their views about the care and support their family members were receiving.

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive. People's assessed needs were reflected in the care records we viewed. Care records contained guidance on how people's care needs should be met.

Is the service well-led?

There were positive values held by staff within the home about promoting people's independence and about maintaining people's well-being. However, roles and responsibilities of staff working within the home were unclear.

There was a lack of effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care. For example, the service did not have an audit system for checking the quality of care within the service.

Policies and procedures had not been updated regularly to ensure they were in line with current best practice guidance.

People spoken with said they liked living at Six Acres they said; ' It is a good place to live,' 'I like living here' and 'I don't ever want to leave here it is great.'

We saw that the staff had a good rapport with the people in their care, knew them well and the atmosphere was warm and friendly.

When asked what they would do if they had any worries they said 'I would tell a member of staff any one would sort it out.'

We spoke briefly with three people who lived at Six Acres. They all appeared content and comfortable with staff. People looked cared for and were appropriately dressed. One visitor told us 'My relative receives a good level of care. It is very personalised. I have no concerns about the care and support here.'

The visitor we spoke stated that he could not think of anything about the service that needed to be changed.

Records of individuals' care delivery had been undertaken by commissioning authorities and individual social workers. We did not see any evidence of concern and a note in a review undertaken in July 2012 states; 'The placement has been and continues to be highly successful.'