• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Mr & Mrs H Modile

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Laglin House, 168 Leigham Court Road, Streatham, London, SW16 2RG (020) 8769 8655

Provided and run by:
Mr & Mrs H Modile

All Inspections

24 November 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 24 November 2015 and was announced. The service registered as Mr & Mrs H Modile is known as Laglin House. The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to four people who have mental health needs. At the time of the inspection there were three people using the service.

At the last inspection on 8 August 2013, the service was meeting the regulations we inspected.

There was no registered manager in post. The previous registered manager was deceased and a replacement manager was not recruited because the provider was permanently closing the service. 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.

At this inspection, we found four breaches of regulations. These breaches relate to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing.

People had risk assessments in place but these were not always up to date and did not provide guidance for staff on how to manage the risks. People and their relatives were involved or contributed to an assessment of their care needs. However, they did not given opportunities to make decisions on how they were to receive care and support.

Training did not equip staff in their caring roles. Appraisals for staff were not completed and the supervision records we saw had not identified areas for professional development or training needs.

The provider did not provide daily management or accountability of people, staff, and the service.

The service did not have routine health and safety checks or quality assurance systems in place. There were no plans in place to develop or improve the service because the provider planned to close it permanently.

Staff respected people’s dignity and privacy. People were cared for by staff who knew them and their likes and dislikes. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible and supported them to maintain relationships with people that mattered to them. Staff reviewed people’s assessed care needs and developed care plans to meet them. People had sufficient food and drink, which met their needs and preferences.

Sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people’s care needs. People had access to health care services and had medicines administered safely as prescribed. People consented to care and support provided by staff. The registered provider had an understanding of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

8 August 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Mr and Mrs Modile had a training programme for staff. Staff told us "The manager suggests courses for me to attend". Staff had supervision every two months, appraisal on an annual basis and informal meetings.

We spoke with one member of staff and found their experiences of working with the provider was positive. They told us, "I am a bank worker and love my job; it is a great place to work".

We found that staff and people's records were accurate and fit for purpose. Records were kept secure and were available when requested. We found well maintained records including appropriate and up to date documentation.

5 February 2013

During a routine inspection

One person living at the service was present when we visited, and they said, "The service is good and I have no complaints. The staff are helpful, I was made to feel welcome when I moved in, it is a homely place to live".

A community psychiatric nurse (CPN) told us staff at the service provided the support and encouragement people needed, they said people had experienced good outcomes since moving to the service with some progressing to more independent style housing.

Despite the many positive outcomes for people using the service we found shortfalls in the operation of the service. The provider has not made arrangements to train and support staff appropriately. Accurate and current records were not consistently maintained. These shortfalls placed people at risk of receiving inappropriate care.

15 February 2012

During a routine inspection

It was not possible to speak with people on the day of the inspection, either because they were unavailable or chose not to speak with us. However, one person told us that they had no complaints about the home.

Although we found that the home was compliant with most of the outcomes we looked at, medication was not always stored correctly.