You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 3 April 2014
Date of Publication: 22 May 2014
Inspection Report published 22 May 2014 PDF | 82.87 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 3 April 2014

During a routine inspection

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask;

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people’s safety and welfare. Suitable risk assessments had been carried out and staff were knowledgeable about the content of these. People who used different types of equipment had these regularly checked and properly maintained. Health and safety audits were carried out by the registered manager on a quarterly basis as part of a system for monitoring people's safety.

Members of staff had been through an appropriate recruitment process. This included carrying out background checks, for example, through the Disclosure and Barring Service. This meant the provider could demonstrate that the staff they employed were suitable and had the skills and experience needed to safely support the people living in the home.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. None of the people who used this service had had applications submitted under this system. However, we saw evidence that staff had received training in relation to the operation of the DoLS and there were appropriate policies in place.

Is the service effective?

The service promoted people's independence and ability to make choices as much as possible. Members of staff described a person-centred approach to care and demonstrated a good working knowledge of the contents of people's support plans. We saw that people were engaged in a wide variety of activities. Suitable equipment was provided and maintained in order to promote people's independence. People were also effectively protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration. One person told us "I watch what I eat because of my diabetes. The food is lovely and I get a choice. Sometimes I help with the cooking."

Is the service caring?

We observed that people were relaxed and confident in their interactions with staff. For example, we observed that people were often engaged in sharing jokes or lightly teasing members of staff. All of the members of staff responded positively to this type of interaction. We spoke to three of the people using this service. They all told us that they were happy with the care being provided. One person said "This has been my home for ages. The people are great. I like it here."

Is the service responsive?

People's support plans carefully described their preferences, likes and dislikes and included a personal development plan. People met regularly with key workers to discuss any changing needs and had access to the activities that they wanted to engage in.

There were no records of any formal complaints having been made by the people using the service. However, people were encouraged to attend a weekly meeting where they could discuss any concerns that they had. Those who did not wish to attend the meeting were encouraged to contribute in other ways. One person told us "I don’t join in with the meeting, but I can say what I want to say. There is nothing wrong at the moment.”

Is the service well-led?

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. People using the service met weekly and could discuss potential improvements to the service. Members of staff were invited to attend monthly meetings where they could raise any concerns and the quality of care being provided was addressed. An area manager visited the service each month and carried out a series of checks to ensure that the quality of care was maintained.