You are here

Ordinary Life Project Association - 67a St George's Road Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 December 2018

At the last inspection on 27 September 2017, we found a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 good governance. We asked the provider to take action to make improvements in their auditing procedures.

Following the inspection, the provider wrote to us, to tell us the action they would take to meet legal requirements. At this inspection we found improvements had been made.

67a St Georges Road is a ‘care home’ registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to three people with learning disabilities. 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. At the time of the inspection three people were living at the service.

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. Registering the Right Support CQC policy

The home manager was in the registration process. 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 safe. Staff understood their responsibilities to safeguard people and to report any concerns. Staff had received training to ensure they remained up to date with recognising the signs of abuse and what to do about it.

People were protected from risks. Where risks had been identified, risk assessments were in place with guidance for staff on action to take to manage the risks. Medicines were administered, stored and managed safely. Protocols were in place to manage ‘as required’ PRN medicines.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and applied its principles in their work. The MCA protects the rights of people who may not be able to make particular decisions.

People were treated as individuals by staff who respected people’s diverse needs and individual preferences. Care plans were personalised and reviewed or updated when people’s needs changed.

The home requested and gained feedback, all of which was positive. There was a complaints procedure in place and no complaints had been received in the 12 months prior to the inspection.

The staff spoke positively about the provider and the management team. The home manager felt supported by senior managers and the values of the service were evident throughout the staff team.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 December 2018

The service was safe.

We found that improvements had been made in the recording protocols for ‘as required’ medicines’. Medicines were administered and managed safely.

People were protected from risks.

There were sufficient, safely recruited staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 December 2018

The service was effective.

People’s needs were assessed and care planned to ensure their needs were met.

People were supported by trained staff who had the knowledge to support then effectively.

Staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and understood and applied its principles.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 December 2018

The service was caring.

Staff were kind compassionate and respectful and treated people and their relatives with dignity and respect.

Staff encouraged and supported people to maintain skills and independence.

Recordings in care plans and daily records were written using respectful language.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 December 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were personalised and gave clear guidance for staff on how to support people.

People received care and support which was individual to their diverse needs.

People had their end of life wishes recorded.

Well-led

Good

Updated 7 December 2018

The service was well-led.

The home had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and care of people.

The staff and home manager felt well supported and values were shared across the whole staff group.

The home requested and gained positive feedback from relatives, visitors and professionals.