You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 October 2019

The Laurels is a residential care home providing personal care to up to six people with mental health needs, acquired brain injury or learning disabilities.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, five people lived at the home and four people received personal care.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they felt safe living at The Laurels. However, we found management checks were not consistent to ensure the environment was always safe or clean; shortfalls we found were addressed during our inspection. However, audits and quality assurance processes had not identified or acted on these issues as was their intended purpose.

Medicines were stored and managed safely. There were policies and procedures in place for safe administration of medicines. People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had been trained and competency checked.

Staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They knew to seek consent for care and knew the process to help those who lacked capacity to make decisions. People’s needs were met by the adaptation and design of the service.

People were protected from abuse. When potential safeguarding incidents occurred, staff followed correct processes and reporting procedures. Staff had received regular safeguarding training. Managers acted to investigate concerns and informed the Local Authority safeguarding team and the Care Quality Commission as required.

Managers understood and complied with their regulatory responsibilities. Care plans were up to date and contained the level of detail needed. Risks associated with people’s care had been identified and full risk assessments were in place.

People’s care was based on their needs and preferences. People were supported to do things they enjoyed. People were independent and chose how to spend their time. An appropriate complaints system was in place.

People were involved in their assessment to ensure the service could meet their needs. Staff had received the training and support required to enable them to fulfil their roles. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they were happy living at The Laurels and liked the staff team who supported them. People were supported to express their opinions about their care. People and staff had positive relationships based on mutual trust. Staff understood people’s conditions and needs well and were responsive to these.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 29 November 2016).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Full information about CQC’s regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.

Follow up

We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 October 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 October 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 October 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 October 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 2 October 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.