You are here

Archived: Valley Road Care Home Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 8 June 2016

During a routine inspection

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 carried out on 11 December 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who used the service and they both told us that staff asked them first about the care they received and the support they needed from staff.

We found that appropriate Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) assessments and best interest decisions had been made for most people. We noted that the person, their relatives and relevant external professionals had been involved in the completion of MCA assessments.

One person who used the service said, “I’m happy with my care and the staff. They help me when I need them.”

During our inspection we observed that staff interacted and talked with people in a caring manner.

We saw that care plans and risk assessments had been reviewed by the manager on a regular basis.

We checked three staff files which all contained evidence of the application and interview process, including completed Disclosure and Barring Service checks which had been completed before staff began working at the service.

All the staff we spoke with said they would feel happy to raise issues and complaints on behalf of people using the service.

The complaints policy was on display in the home in an ‘easy read’ format. This meant people using the service and their relatives had access to information on making complaints should they need to.

Inspection carried out on 21 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. One person who uses the service told us they had been a member of interview panels when new staff were recruited.

We talked with five staff who were able to discuss the care and welfare needs of individual people using the service. Staff said, “The care plans are useful because they are detailed and there is enough information.”

We saw that people using the service had a support plan, medication records, finance book in place. These were read by staff and people using the service and updated to reflect service provision for each person.

We spoke with relatives of a person receiving care who said, “My relative feels safe with staff.”

Staff described the procedure for reporting medication errors; they were able to explain medication requirements for each individual person. We saw that medications were stored in locked cupboards and temperatures checked daily.

Staff attended training, which related to identified care needs of individual people using the service; including training in dementia, autism and epilepsy. Staff received appropriate professional development.

We saw audits completed for care support plans, risk assessments, staff training and supervision meetings. The audits were clearly documented and regularly reviewed to maintain a consistent delivery of care.

People’s personal records were kept securely and were accurate and fit for purpose.

Inspection carried out on 15 November 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

Two people using services said they had come to have a look around the home before they made a decision to move in. Whereas one person said a relative had visited the home on their behalf.

Four people said staff respected their privacy and knocked on their bedroom doors before they entered.

Three people said the staff were nice and kind and they looked after them properly.

One person said staff answered their call bell during the night and they helped them when needed.

Two people said the staff understood them and knew what their needs were.

People using service were happy with the activities on offer and they enjoyed going on holiday.

Three people using services said they felt safe living at Valley Road Care Home and they had somewhere safe to keep their personal things.

Three people said staff were kind to them and they had everything they needed. However when asked if the staff ever made them unhappy or upset them, one person said, “Not very often.” They chose not to expand upon this comment.

One person using services said there were meetings they could attend to have a say about the home and service they received.

Two people using services said they knew who to complain to if they were unhappy.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)