You are here

Archived: Valley Road Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 9 July 2016

We inspected Valley Road Care Home on 8 June 2016. The inspection was unannounced.

Valley Road Care Home is located in Carlton, Nottingham. The service provides accommodation, personal care and support for up to 11 people with learning disabilities or autism spectrum disorder. At the time of our visit nine people were living at the service.

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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 told us they felt safe and were protected from the risk of abuse as staff had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities if they suspected abuse was happening.

Risks to peoples safety were identified and assessments carried out and followed by staff to minimise risk of harm.

People received care and support in a timely way. Appropriate action had been taken by the registered manager to fill staff vacancies and the staff team had worked hard to ensure that people’s support needs were met during staff shortages.

People received their medicines as prescribed and the management of medicines was safe.

People received support from staff who received training and support to ensure they could carry out their roles effectively.

People were encouraged to make independent decisions wherever possible. However, people were not always protected by the Mental Capacity Act (2005) in the event they lacked capacity to make some decisions.

People were supported to maintain their nutritional and health needs. Referrals were made to health care professionals for additional support or guidance when needed and staff followed their guidance to ensure people maintained good health.

People were supported in a respectful and dignified manner and we observed that positive caring relationships had been developed between staff and people using the service. Where possible people were supported to make choices about their care and daily activities.

Staff understood peoples support needs and ensured they received personalised responsive care. People had the opportunity to take part in activities as they wished. People’s care records were in the process of being updated and the registered manager acknowledged that further improvements to these were required.

People, who lived at the service, and their relatives, knew how to raise an issue and were confident these would be listened to and acted on.

The registered manager told us about improvements they were implementing to ensure people resided in a consistently clean environment. Quality monitoring systems were in place and effective in identifying areas for improvement and ensuring these were acted on.

There was an open and transparent culture at the service and the views of people who used the service were sought in monitoring the quality of service provision.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 9 July 2016

The service was safe

People told us they felt safe and were protected from the risk of abuse as staff had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities if they suspected abuse was happening.

Risks to peoples safety were identified and assessments carried out and followed by staff to minimise risk of harm.

People received care and support in a timely way. Appropriate action had been taken by the registered manager to fill staff vacancies and by the staff team and to ensure people’s support needs were met during staff shortages.

People received their medicines as prescribed and the management of medicines was safe.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 9 July 2016

The service was not consistently effective.

People were encouraged to make independent decisions wherever possible. However, people were not always protected by the Mental Capacity Act (2005) in the event they lacked capacity to make some decisions.

People received support from staff who received training and support to ensure they could carry out their roles effectively.

People were supported to maintain their nutritional and health needs.

Referrals were made to health care professionals for additional support or guidance when needed and staff followed their guidance to ensure people maintained good health.

Caring

Good

Updated 9 July 2016

The service was caring.

People were supported to make choices and were treated in a kind and caring manner by staff.

People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was protected.

People were involved in the design and review of their care where able.

Responsive

Good

Updated 9 July 2016

The service was responsive.

Staff understood peoples support needs and ensured they received personalised responsive care. People had the opportunity to take part in activities as they wished.

People’s care records were in the process of being updated and the registered manager acknowledged that further improvements to these were required.

People, who lived at the service, and their relatives, knew how to raise an issue and were confident these would be listened to and acted on.

Well-led

Good

Updated 9 July 2016

The service was well led.

Quality monitoring systems were in place to identify areas for improvement and ensure these were acted on. The registered manager told us about improvements they were implementing to ensure people resided in a consistently clean environment.

There was an open and transparent culture at the service and the views of people who used the service were sought in monitoring the quality of service provision.

There was a clear management structure in place.