You are here

Inshore Support Limited - 5 Trinity Street Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 June 2018

This inspection took place on 11 April 2018 and was unannounced. The service was last inspection in November 2015 and was rated as ‘Good’ in all questions asked.

5 Trinity Street is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. 5 Trinity Street accommodates three people in one adapted building.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. We saw that the service conformed to these standards.

There was a registered manager, but they were not present during the 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 were supported by a group of staff who had received training in how to recognise signs of abuse. Staff were aware of the risks to people and what actions they should take if they suspected a person was a risk of harm. Where safeguarding concerns arose, they were responded to appropriately. Behaviour management plans in place provided staff with information on how to support people safely and in line with their specific needs.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who benefitted from an induction and training which would provide them with the skills to care for people effectively and safely. People received their medicines as prescribed by their GP but medication audits had failed to identify some medication records were inconsistently recorded.

Systems were in place to protect people from the spread of infection. Accidents and incidents were reported, investigated and recorded and where appropriate individual lessons were learnt and practice changed.

Staff were provided with the information required to support people’s care, health and social well-being. People were supported to visit their GP and other healthcare professionals in order to maintain good health. People were encouraged to make choices regarding their daily living, including planning and preparing their meals.

Staff routinely obtained people’s consent prior to offering support. 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.

People received support from staff who treated them with dignity and respect. Staff were described as kind and caring and supported people to maintain their independence. People were provided with information in a format they understood.

People were routinely involved in the planning of their care and supported to take part in activities they enjoyed.

Where complaints were raised, they were investigated and responded to appropriately. People were confident that if they did raise concerns they would be listened to and action would be taken.

People spoke positively of the new staff who had been bought into the service and the management team who were supporting them. Staff felt supported in their role and were equipped with the information required to meet people’s needs.

Systems were in place to provide people with the opportunity to give feedback on the service. A variety of audits were in place to assess the quality of the service provided, but not all audits had identified the concerns raised during the inspection.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 June 2018

The service was safe.

People were supported by staff who were aware of the risks to them and were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff. People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed by their GP.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 June 2018

The service was effective.

Pre-assessment processes provided staff with the information required to meet people�s needs. Staff were provided with an induction and training to equip them with the skills required to meet people�s needs. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and good health. Staff routinely obtained people�s consent prior to offering support.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 June 2018

The service was caring.

People described staff as kind and caring. Staff treated people with dignity and respected and supported them to maintain their independence. People were supported to make their own decisions regarding their daily living.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 June 2018

The service was responsive.

People were involved in the planning of their care and were supported to take part in activities that were of interest to them. Where complaints had been received, they were investigated and responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 6 June 2018

The service was not consistently well led.

Audits in place had failed to identify a number of areas that had been highlighted during the inspection. Staff felt supported in their role and able to approach management with any concerns they may have. Management responded appropriately to concerns raised.