You are here

Octavia Housing - Leonora House Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11 June 2014
Date of Publication: 22 July 2014
Inspection Report published 22 July 2014 PDF

Overview

Inspection carried out on 11 June 2014

During a routine inspection

A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and staff told us. It also takes account of the information and records we looked at.

If you would like to see the evidence that supports our summary then please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Leonora House is an extra care housing scheme for people aged 60 years and over. 24 hour care is available to those who need it and is provided by care staff based at Leonora House. The service also operates an outreach service to those living in their own homes in the local community.

We looked at the support plans for four people living at Leonora House. We saw that these contained assessments covering health needs and medication. We saw that risk assessments had also been completed in areas such as falls and mobility, diet and nutrition and behavioural management. Support plans and risk assessments were updated every three months or earlier if needs changed. We spoke with three people who used the service who told us they had been involved in the care planning process.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. Staff had been trained to deal with emergencies by ensuring people were safe and comfortable and by calling 999 when and if needed. People who used the service told us they felt safe and secure.

Is the service effective?

Staff had been recruited appropriately and been asked to provide two references from previous employers and undergo Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks.

Staff told us they had completed an induction which had covered core subjects such as health and safety, safeguarding and medication handling. The induction had been followed by a period of shadowing more experienced staff. There was a probation period of six months for all new staff.

People who used the service expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their support needs in collaboration with the staff team. People we spoke with told us �I try and get involved� and �staff always ask me what I would like to do.�

Is the service caring?

People who used the service told us "I love it here� and �staff are so kind and helpful and always willing to help.� We saw that a client satisfaction survey had been carried out in January 2014. From the results we saw that people were satisfied with the support they received and felt the service was sensitive to their social, cultural and/or religious needs.

Is the service responsive?

Staff told us meetings for people who used the service took place on a six monthly basis where issues such as the range of activities, complaints and suggestions were addressed.

There were systems in place to record accidents/incidents and information available to people who used the service about how to make a complaint. We saw from the complaints logging system that the service had received no complaints in the past 12 month period. People who used the service told us they would speak directly to the manager if they had a complaint.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a registered manager in post. Staff we spoke with told us that the manager operated an open door policy. We were told that staff received supervision every six to eight weeks and were appraised annually. We looked at staff records and saw that supervision had taken place for most within the last month. Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management team.