You are here

Archived: Care Management Group - 361 The Ridge Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 29 May 2014
Date of Publication: 2 July 2014
Inspection Report published 02 July 2014 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 29 May 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

Reasons for our judgement

At our last inspection in November 2013 we found that the provider did not have an effective system to assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. This was because areas the provider had identified for improvement had not been followed up and people who used the service did not have opportunities to feedback their views. The provider wrote to us after the inspection and told us that they had taken action to make improvements to quality monitoring.

When we returned we saw records of monthly resident meetings. The last meeting was in April 2014 and had been written up using symbols and pictures so that it was easier for people who used the service to understand. We saw that topics for discussion had included activities, holidays and safeguarding. This demonstrated that people were asked for their views about the service.

We noted that at the last resident meeting people were informed about complaints and asked if they had any concerns. A notice board in the hallway displayed an easy read guide on how to complain, although the provider may like to note that the contact details of CQC were incorrect. This meant that the provider took account of comments and complaints to improve the service.

The provider carried out quarterly quality audits of the service. The last available record was for the audit carried out in January 2014. This showed that the provider carried out a through quality check of all aspects of the service. Actions identified from the previous audit in October 2013 had been reviewed and progress evaluated. Areas considered included records for people who used the service, meetings and person centred support. The provider had also made an assessment as to how the service was meeting the required standards in all outcome areas. An action plan had been drawn up which identified any areas for improvement, who was responsible and the timescale for completion.

The manager told us that some aspects of the service were reviewed more regularly to ensure they were effective. For example, senior staff carried out a daily diary audit to ensure that there were no gaps in recording. We saw evidence that where gaps had been identified, staff had been sent a reminder about what information was expected. This demonstrated that the provider took action where areas for improvement had been identified.