We carried out a review of the data available to us about Housing 21 - Greenrod Place on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Housing 21 - Greenrod Place, you can give feedback on this service.
Housing 21 – Greenrod Place is an extra care housing scheme. The scheme provides 31 one-bedroom and seven two-bedroom flats to rent and five two-bedroom flats to buy through shared ownership. People received support with their personal care, support with medicines, food shopping and cleaning. People can also be visited by care workers from other external providers. At the time of the inspection 37 people were receiving support with personal care.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Care workers administered people’s medicines in a safe way and as prescribed. People told us they felt safe when receiving care. There was a process to investigate any concerns regarding the care provided.
The provider had processes in place for the recording and investigation of incidents and accidents.
Risk management plans were in place providing care workers with guidance on how to minimise risks for people using the service.
There was a robust recruitment process and there were enough care workers deployed to provide support based upon the care needs of people.
Care workers received the training and supervision they required to provide them with the knowledge and skills to provide care in a safe and effective way.
Detailed assessments of a person’s needs were completed before they moved into the extra care scheme. The care plans described the care and support a person required and how they wanted it to be provided.
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 were supported to eat a healthy diet and to access healthcare professionals when required.
The provider had a complaints process in place and people told us they knew what to do if they wished to raise any concerns.
People using the service were supported to access the community to reduce the risk of social isolation.
There was a range of quality assurance processes in place to identify if any actions were required to improve the service. People using the service and staff felt the service was well-led.
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 20 May 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Housing and Care 21 – Greenrod Place provide support for people in their own homes within an extra care housing complex. The scheme provides 31 one-bedroom and seven two-bedroom flats to rent and five two bedroom flats to buy through shared ownership. People received support with their personal care, support with medicines, food shopping and cleaning. People can also be visited by care workers from other external providers. At the time of the inspection 40 people were receiving support with personal care.
At the time of the inspection there was a registered manager in place. 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.
At the last inspection on 26, 27 and 30 October 2015 we identified issues in relation to risk assessments and care plans. During this inspection we saw improvements had been made.
A range of risk assessments were in place in the person’s care folder in relation to the care being provided. The provider had introduced risk assessments in response to specific issues.
The care plans were now reviewed regularly and provided detailed, focused information on how each person wanted their care provided. People we spoke with felt the care workers were caring and treated them with dignity and respect while providing care. Care plans identified the person’s cultural and religious needs.
People told us they felt safe when they received support and the provider had policies and procedures in place to deal with any concerns that were raised about the care provided.
The provider had an effective recruitment process in place.
There was a policy and procedure in place for the administration of medicines.
The provider had policies, procedures and training in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and care workers were aware of the importance of supporting people to make choices.
Care workers had received training identified by the provider as mandatory to ensure they were providing appropriate and effective care for people using the service. Also care workers had regular supervision with their manager and received an annual appraisal.
The provider had a complaints process in place and people knew what to do if they wished to raise any concerns.
The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the care provided and these provided appropriate information to identify issues with the quality of the service.
We undertook an announced inspection of Housing and Care 21 – Greenrod Place on 26, 27 and 30 October 2015. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming because the location is an extra care service and we needed the provider to be available to assist with the inspection. The service provides purpose built flats in a community setting, with flexible care and support services available on-site to enable people to live as independently as possible.
Housing and Care 21 – Greenrod Place provide support for people in their own homes within an extra care housing complex. The scheme provides 31 one-bedroom and seven two-bedroom flats to rent and five two bedroom flats to buy through shared ownership. People received support with their personal care, support with medicines, food shopping and cleaning. People can also be visited by care workers from other external providers. At the time of the inspection 38 people were receiving support with personal care.
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. The registered manager for Greenrod Place was responsible for two different services. There was a senior member of staff who was due to take on the full time registered manager role at the service but they had recently left the post without making an application to the CQC to be registered. The operations manager explained that an experienced registered manager who currently worked for the provider would start at the service at the end of November 2015.
The provider had generic risk assessments in place but they had not identified possible risks in relation to specific issues for people using the service and provide care workers with guidance on how to reduce these risks.
It was not clearly indicated on the support plans when they were last reviewed and if any changes to the support the person required had been made. This meant that care workers could not clearly identify if the information provided in the support plan represented the current care needs of the person.
People using the service and care workers felt the service was well-led and effective following the recent changes in senior management but the service improvement implemented by the operations manager had not been in place long enough to demonstrate sustained improvements.
People using the service and staff gave mixed feedback relating to staffing numbers with some people feeling there was not enough staff with other people happy with the staffing levels they experienced.
People using the service felt safe when they received care and support. The provider had processes in place to respond to any safeguarding concerns. There was a procedure in place to record and investigate any incidents and accidents.
The provider had an effective recruitment process in place. There was a policy and procedure in place for the administration of medicines.
The provider had a policy and training in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and care workers were aware of the importance of supporting people to make choices.
Care workers had received training identified by the provider as mandatory to ensure they were providing appropriate and effective care for people using the service. Also care workers had regular supervision with their manager. People we spoke with felt the care workers were caring and treated them with dignity and respect while providing care.
Support plans identified the person’s cultural and religious needs. The plans also identified the person’s preference in relation to the language spoken by the care worker.
The support plans identified how the person wished for their care to be provided and care workers completed a record of each visit recording what support was provided.
During this visit, we found improvements had been made. We spoke with eight people who use the service and people spoke positively about it. One person told us 'the staff are so good here, they do everything they can to help." Another person told us 'we have plenty of activities, the manager has arranged a lot for us, and its brilliant we have a communal restaurant it means we can meet up with other people and socialise."
We looked at the care records of four people and found these contained information about people's personal preferences such as the preferred gender of care staff to support them. We found there were also personal profiles about people detailing family relationships and who was involved in their care. People told us they had been involved in the writing of their care plan. One person told us 'the manager and care staff sat and asked me lots of questions about what I wanted."
We found people's care had been planned effectively to ensure their safety and welfare. Each person had a care needs assessment and a detailed care plan which informed care staff how to meet people's needs. We found care records were updated on a monthly basis or where there had been a change in the person's needs. This meant that steps had been taken to prevent people from the risk of receiving inappropriate or unsafe care.
We looked at incident records and found where allegations of abuse had been made the provider had taken appropriate action to protect people by carrying out investigations and informing relevant authorities such as the local authority, police and CQC. We also found that the service had only employed people who were suitable to work in the service. This meant the provider had taken steps to protect people from the risks of abuse.
People told us they were satisfied with the care they received. People praised staff for the care and attention they receive. However one person told us 'I don't like many of the care staff and I don't think they like me, I never get my calls at appropriate times and I have completed most of my tasks when they arrive '. Another group of people told us 'the new manager is brilliant, we now have activities to too and we interact with each other more'.
We did find that although activities were being provided aspects of people's care planning needed to be more detailed and people's needs were not always being met which placed them at risk of inappropriate or unsafe care. We found at a previous inspection people did not have sufficient activities.
We looked at how people using the service were safeguarded. We found although the service had a system in place for protecting people from abuse, on the day of our visit people had no hot water in their flats for six days and CQC and other authorities were not notified.
We checked to ensure that there were sufficient staff employed with the correct skills to care for people. We were told by people there was never a problem with staffing.
We talked with people about making complaints. People told us "we know how to complain if we are unhappy".
People who use the service said that the management team communicated much better with them now than in the past and that they now have opportunities to give their views about how the service is run. This view was supported by the local authority, who told us that people who live there are now much more involved in shaping the service. The local authority also said that the management team had demonstrated a positive approach to working with them to address any concerns they had and to improve the service provided to the people who live there.
People who use the service gave positive feedback about the care and support they receive from staff, saying that care workers were professional, polite and caring. People told us that staff supported them to get medical treatment if they needed it. People also said that the package of care was reviewed and amended if their needs changed.
Several people who use the service told us that they wanted more opportunities to take part in activities and some people told us that they would like support to enable them to go out more. People said they had had the opportunity to tell the provider about their wish for more activities and that they felt the management team had listened to their views.
People who use the service told us that their flats were suitable for their needs. Those with mobility problems told us that their flats were accessible and that they were supported to obtain any equipment they needed to support their mobility.
People told us that they enjoyed the flexibility of having privacy when they want it and being able to use the communal facilities when they wished to. People also said that they valued the security of having a flat within an environment that is staffed at all times. People told us that the communal rooms of the home were kept clean and tidy but some people said they were not happy with the cleaning service in their flats.