You are here

Pathways (North West) Limited - 136 Whalley Road Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

This inspection took place on 25 and 26 October 2017; the first day of the inspection was unannounced. We had previously carried out an inspection at the service in September 2016. During that inspection we found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because medicines were not always safely managed. Following that inspection, the provider sent us a plan which set out the action they were taking to meet the regulations. During this inspection we confirmed the required improvements had been made in relation to how medicines were managed in the service.

Whalley Road is a residential care home that provides accommodation, nursing care, support and rehabilitation for up to nine people with a mental illness or learning disability. The home is situated in the Accrington area of Lancashire. Accommodation is provided in single en suite bedrooms.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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. The registered manager had been responsible for managing the service since October 2016 and registered with CQC since 11 October 2017.

Staff had received training in safeguarding adults. They were able to tell us of the action they would take to protect people who used the service from the risk of abuse. The registered manager and staff were observed to have positive relationships with people living in the home.

One person who used the service told us they did not always feel safe in the home due to the behaviour of another individual. The registered manager told us they had taken action to involve external professionals and advocacy services in a review of this person’s care and support needs. This should help to ensure people felt safe living in the home.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were safely recruited. People who used the service told us staff provided the right level of support to meet their needs and to achieve their rehabilitation goals.

People were supported to have 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.

Robust systems were in place to ensure the safe handling of medicines. People were supported to take responsibility for their own medicines whenever possible.

Care records we reviewed included information about the risks people might experience. Care plans were in place to help ensure staff provided the level of support necessary to manage the identified risks. Care plans were regularly reviewed to address any changes in a person’s needs.

Regular checks took place to ensure the safety and cleanliness of the environment. People who used the service were responsible for cleaning their own bedrooms, with support from staff as necessary. Systems were also in place to reduce the risk of cross infection in the service.

Staff told us they received the induction, training and supervision they needed to be able to carry out their roles effectively. Staff demonstrated a commitment to providing high quality personalised care for the individuals who lived in the home.

Staff were able to demonstrate a good understanding of the legal frameworks under which people’s placements at Whalley Road were arranged. The registered manager had taken appropriate action to apply for restrictions in place in an individual’s best interests to be legally authorised.

People who used the service were encouraged to participate in activities which met their interests and helped to promote their health and well-being.

Records we reviewed showed that, where necessary, people were provided with support from staff to attend hea

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was safe.

Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and were aware of the action to take should they witness or suspect abuse had occurred.

Appropriate action had been taken to address the impact of one person�s behaviour on the atmosphere in the home to help people feel safe.

Staff had been safely recruited. There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet the diverse needs of people who used the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received the induction, supervision and training they required to be able to deliver effective care and support.

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people�s rights to make their own decisions and choices. Appropriate arrangements were in place to ensure any restrictions in place were legally authorised.

People were supported to maintain good physical and mental health through regular monitoring in the service and attendance at external appointments.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was caring.

People who used the service told us staff were supportive and would always help them to achieve their goals.

Staff demonstrated a commitment to providing high quality support and care.

People were encouraged to access independent advocacy services. This helped to ensure their views and wishes were genuinely considered when decisions were being made about their lives.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was responsive.

Arrangements were in place to help ensure people received individualised care to meet their diverse needs.

People who used the service were involved in reviewing the support they received. This helped to ensure the service was responsive to people�s changing needs.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was not consistently well-led.

Staff told us they enjoyed working in the home. However we received mixed feedback about the leadership and management in the home and the wider service.

Regular checks had not been carried out to ensure that the fire alarm and emergency lighting in the home were functioning correctly. In addition, the fire risk assessment had not been reviewed since January 2016.

Although the provider carried out regular satisfaction surveys, it was not clear from the records we saw what action had been taken in response to negative feedback received. The manager told us action plans from future surveys would be fully documented.