Background to this inspection
Updated
19 September 2017
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This was a comprehensive inspection, which took place because we carry out comprehensive inspections of services rated Good at least once every two years. This inspection took place on 25 July 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice because 22 Queensbury Road is a small service. Staff and people are often out. We needed to be sure someone would be in.
The inspection team consisted of one inspector.
Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at notifications about important events that had taken place in the service, which the provider is required to tell us by law. We contacted the local authority that funded some of the care of people using the service and Healthwatch Northamptonshire, the local consumer champion for people using adult social care services, to seek feedback about the service. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during our inspection.
We spoke with two people who used the service. We spoke with four staff including two support workers, the registered manager and the assistant manager. We contacted an advocate of one of the people who used the service.
We looked at two people’s care records, which included mental health care plans, health records, risk assessments and daily care records. We looked at a staff file to see how the provider operated their recruitment procedures. We looked at information about staff training and support and records associated with the provider’s quality assurance system.
We asked the registered manager to send additional information after the inspection concerning a renewal of a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation. The information we requested was sent to us in a timely manner.
Updated
19 September 2017
The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to five people living with learning disabilities. Accommodation was provided in a detached house in a residential area of Kettering, Northamptonshire. At this inspection, there were five people living in the service.
At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection on 25 August 2015, the service was rated Good in all domains. At this inspection we found the service remained Good in Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive but required improvement in Well-led.
The service was kept clean, but guidance about safe cleaning methods using mops and buckets was not always followed. We made a recommendation about this.
Care plans were focused on people’s needs and how they should be supported. However further action was needed to ensure that information in different parts of people’s care plans was consistent.
People were supported to stay healthy and to access healthcare services when they needed them. However, a person had not been informed about a health screening programme they had been invited to participate in two consecutive years. We made a recommendation that the provider has systems in place to ensure that invitations to people to participate in health screening programmes are acted upon.
The service had a registered manager. 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 continued to be safe at 22 Queensbury Road. People were protected against the risk of abuse. People felt safe in the service. Staff recognised the signs of abuse or neglect and what to look out for. Medicines were managed safely and people received them as prescribed.
Staff followed appropriate guidance to minimise identified risks to people's health, safety and welfare. There were enough staff to keep people safe. The provider had appropriate arrangements in place to check the suitability and fitness of new staff to work at the service.
Each person had an up to date, personalised support plan, which set out how their care and support needs should be met by staff. These were reviewed regularly. Staff received regular training and supervision to help them to meet people's needs effectively.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff were caring and treated people with dignity and respect and ensured people's privacy was maintained particularly when being supported with their personal care needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff encouraged people to actively participate in activities, pursue their interests and to maintain relationships with people that mattered to them.
The registered manager ensured the complaints procedure was made available to people to enable them to make a complaint if they needed to. Regular checks and reviews of the service continued to be made to ensure people experienced good quality safe care and support.
The registered manager checked staff were focussed on people experiencing good quality care and support. People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about how the service could be improved. This was used to make changes and improvements that people wanted.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.