• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Southfields Care Homes - 111 Crescent Road

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

111 Crescent Road, Crumpsall, Manchester, Lancashire, M8 9WT (0161) 740 9405

Provided and run by:
Southfields Care Homes Limited

All Inspections

2 and 7 July 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 2 and 7 July 2015. The first day of the inspection was unannounced and the second day was announced.

Southfields Care Home is a large property providing accommodation over two floors. The provider delivers a service for three adults with learning disabilities, mental health needs and/or physical health needs.

The service did not have a registered manager. The previous registered manager had recently resigned and an acting manager had been in place at the service since May 2015. 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.

The home is one of two homes that the provider has in the local area. The home had five support workers and a senior support worker. There had been changes to the senior management team with the registered manager for both homes and the locality manager leaving recently which meant the home did not have a qualified manager to ensure the service was meeting the fundamental standards. We carried out this inspection to assess whether people were receiving safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led care. We found breaches in the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014.

Not all risks to people had been recognised and assessed. Action had not always been taken to keep people safe. We found risk assessments had not been reviewed and changed to make sure they were up to date and accurate. Staff knew how to recognise some of the different types of abuse and said they would report any concerns to the manager, they were unsure of how to report abuse to other agencies outside of the service. Staff did not have the knowledge to meet people’s needs and deliver care in the way they needed them to.

Care plans and behaviour plans were not up to date and information was held in different places making it difficult to find. Despite the care plans being recently reviewed, information was not always accurate and did not reflect changes in people’s needs. Staff were using conflicting and out of date information.

Medication practices were not always safe. People received their medication on time however medicines were kept in an unsafe manner. Arrangements for taking medication away from the home needed improvement. Medication stock control systems were not robust enough to prevent the possibility of medication being mis-managed.

Health action plans were not in place for two of the people who used the service. Health action plans hold information about the person’s health needs, the professionals who support those needs and various appointments. Because health action plans were not in place for everyone who used the service, this meant their overall health needs potentially were not identified or addressed.

The service was not well led and the staff lacked the direction and support they needed to meet people’s needs and provide care safely. The Care Quality Commission has a statutory duty to monitor the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) are part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The aim is to make sure that people in care homes, hospitals and supported living who lack the capacity to make decisions for themselves are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their choices.

The provider did not follow the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to make sure that any decisions that were made for people lacking capacity were made in the person’s best interests. Some DoLS applications were needed and had not been made. We were concerned that the process and paperwork had not been followed rather than any deprivation of liberty in operational practice. We have asked the provider to send us the statutory notifications regarding Deprivation of Liberty safeguards (DoLs) for people who use the service.

We saw that people's nutritional and hydration needs were met but were not always monitored effectively.

People were not always involved in assessments of their needs and the planning of their care. Care plans did not include information on what people could do well or what their personal goals were.

We saw that people were supported to make complaints. The complaints process was in a format people could understand and the service encouraged people to give feedback.

Relevant recruitment checks were made to make sure staff were suitable to work at the home.

We found a number of breaches of the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014 in relation to requirements relating to registered managers, person centred care, need for consent, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

10 July 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who used the service and they told us they were happy with the service they received and that staff knew how to support them. They told us they liked living at 111 Crescent Road.

During our last inspection on 7 March 2013 we identified concerns that the home was not monitoring people's weight properly and were not supporting people to have a healthy balanced diet. We also found that care plans were not person centred. We carried out this inspection to check that the provider had taken action to address our concerns.

During this inspection on 10 July 2013 we found new person centred care plans were in place which included care plans for weight monitoring and diet. We saw that the home weighed people regularly and staff took action when people lost weight. This meant people received appropriate care and support that was centred on their needs. We also found that people had a variety of healthy, nutritious meals in sufficient amounts to meet their needs.

We found that the service was clean and in a good state of repair. This was because the provider had adequate infection control systems in place and carried out relevant checks to ensure the property was safe and suitable for purpose.

The provider monitored and investigated incidents and complaints appropriately. We saw that the provider had audit systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service and that there were plans to improve these systems.

7 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who used the service. They told us they were happy with the service they received and felt staff understood their needs.

We spoke with the relative of a person who used the service. They told us they had no concerns and were happy with the care their relative received. Comments included: 'The premises are very clean', 'He seems to be eating well' and 'Anytime I've wanted to visit, they've been ok'.

The people at 111 Crescent Road were supported by sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and trained staff.

The provider had an effective system in place for receiving, handling and responding to comments and complaints. People were protected from the risk of abuse and the provider responded appropriately to any allegations of abuse.

However, we found the provider could not show they had arrangements in place to obtain and review consent from people who used the service. This was because people's care records were not signed by the person who used the service and care records reviews did not show signs of their involvement.

Southfields Care Homes -111 Crescent Road were not providing people with appropriate, safe and effective care. This was because we found the planning and delivery of care did not meet individual needs or ensure their welfare. We also found that people were not always supported to have a healthy, balanced diet.

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a review of all the provider's locations in January 2012 in relation to specific concerns raised with us that people living in the provider's homes had been moved between the homes due to staffing shortages. This review has been carried out to check that the provider has now put sufficient measures in place to prevent this from happening again. This review did not involve site visits to the provider's homes and we did not receive any other feedback from people using the service.

15 November 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

We carried out this review of compliance to investigate a concern that the provider had moved people using the service from the location where they usually live to another of the provider's locations because of staffing shortages. We spoke to some people using the service during this review and they confirmed this had happened. Due to the need to respect people's confidentiality we are not able to comment further on the views of people using the service. However, the comments people made have been fed back to the provider's staff.

16 August 2011

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke to one of the three people using the service about the issues we were following up in this review, in particular their perception of safety. They told us that they did not always feel safe and they sometimes felt scared. They also raised concerns about their privacy as their bathroom was overlooked.

18 July 2011

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke to one of the three people using the service about the issues we were following up in this review, in particular their perception of safety. They told us that they did not always feel safe and they sometimes felt scared. They also raised concerns about their privacy as their bathroom was overlooked.

17 June 2011

During a routine inspection

People told us that they liked where they lived and they felt well cared for. They said they felt involved in their care and were able to choose how to spend their days. They felt that staff listened to them and took their views into account. They described activities they liked to do and said staff supported them with these. People said they felt able to talk to staff if they were worried about anything but they did not always feel fully supported by staff at night. People said they liked the food and they could choose what they wanted to eat.