Archived: Care Management Group - 53 Rutland Gardens

This inspection took place on 19 January 2016 and was unannounced.

We last inspected Care Management Group - 53 Rutland Gardens on 13 January 2014 and we found no concerns.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Feedback received from people, relatives and visiting professionals throughout the inspection process was positive about the care and support, the approach of the staff and atmosphere in the service. Staff supported people to maintain and build on their independence. They showed respect and maintained people’s dignity. People had access to health care professionals when they needed it. One person said, “I feel very safe here, due to the staff always being around to support me with any general problem I may have.”

People told us they felt at home at Care Management Group - 53 Rutland Gardens. Visitors were warmly welcomed and people were supported to maintain their own friendships and relationships.

Staff had a clear understanding of the procedures in place to safeguard people from abuse.

Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely by staff who were suitably trained.

Recruitment records showed there were systems in place to ensure staff were suitable to work at the service.

The registered manager understood the Mental Capacity Act and worked with the local authority to assess people’s mental capacity and to make decisions about their support.

Systems for effective management were been established in all areas. For example, records were up to date and completed in a consistent way.

Staff were provided with an induction and training programme which supported them to meet the needs of people. One member of staff said, “It was the most thorough induction training I have ever had. There were sixteen learning modules and I had to pass each one. It really made me think about the job and my role.”

There was a variety of activity and opportunity for interaction that championed people’s preferences and choice. We saw that people had a range of commitments during the week, from attending adult education courses, to helping out at a lunch club and rehearsing in a band. For others, who liked to spend more time in their bedroom and in the communal areas, staff supported them in their choices.

People liked the food provided and were involved in the planning of menus. One person said, “The foods not too bad here actually. I help out with the cooking a lot, to help me with my independence in the future”.

People and their relatives were given information on how to make a complaint. Feedback from people was asked for and responded to.

There was an open culture at the service and this was promoted by a respected a visible, respected and popular registered manager. One person said, “We all love the manager. She gets on well with everyone here.”

We found that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found that people's needs were assessed and reviewed regularly. Support was planned and delivered in line with individual care plans. One person told us, "This is a great team with lots of communication and laughs. I am really impressed by their achievements".

People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. During our inspection, we viewed people's bedrooms, communal areas, bathrooms and the kitchen. We saw the equipment that the service used was clean and well maintained.

People's personal records including medical records, were accurate and fit for purpose. We saw ample evidence on people's support documentation that assessments of people's individual needs were completed and that these records were updated when needed. One member of staff, who was also a keyworker to a person who used the service, told us, 'Their person centred plan (PCP), is written down and it looks at every aspect of their support.'

We saw that the provider had taken steps to ensure the premises were adequately maintained.

Care records showed that people had been supported and encouraged to make decisions about their lives. We saw that people or their representatives had been involved in planning their care and support. When people's needs changed, we found that records had been updated to reflect this.

We found the provider had not taken steps to provide care in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. We have asked the provider to take action on this.

Records we looked at showed staff were suitably trained and supported to carry out their role.

The provider had quality assurance systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service people received.