Archived: Care Elite

Updated 12 June 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Before the inspection we looked at all the information we had about the service. This information included the statutory notifications that the provider had sent to CQC. A notification is information about significant events which the service is required to send us by law. In addition, we reviewed the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asked the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service did well and improvements they planned to make.

We visited the service on 3 May 2018. Our inspection was unannounced and carried out by one inspector.

On the day of our visit we spoke with three people using the service. We also spoke with two staff. We looked at care records for two people, staff files for three staff members, medicines records for two people and other records relating to the running of the service.

After the inspection we contacted five health and social care professionals to gather their feedback and we received two responses.

Updated 12 June 2018

This inspection took place on 3 May 2018 and was unannounced.

Care Elite is a supported living service. Supported living services are where people live in their own home and receive care and/or support in order to promote their independence. The service provides support to five young adults males with mental health issues, some of whom also had autism. There were four people using the service at the time of our inspection. At our inspection in September 2017 we found a continued breach of the regulation relating to staff support. We served a warning notice and told the provider to be compliant by 31 January 2018. We also found a breach in relation to the way the provider governed the service.

There was no registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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 manager registered with us had recently left the service and the director told us a new manager had been recruited who would register with us as soon as possible. This meant leadership was not always visible across the service, although staff told us the director was accessible to them at any time.

The service had improved since our last inspection and the provider was now compliant with regulations. The service met the requirements of our warning notice and staff were provided with suitable support with a training and supervision programme. The way the provider governed the service had also improved and there was no longer a breach in relation to this. The provider had followed their action plan to improve the service and the director had a good understanding of their role and responsibilities, as did staff.

Systems were in place to protect people from abuse and staff received training in their responsibilities to safeguard people.

Risks relating to people’s care were reduced as the provider assessed and managed risks. However, the provider did not always encourage positive risk taking to provide people with more choice and control in their lives. Although the way risks were recorded could be improved for clarity, assessments contained sufficiently detailed information about risks to guide staff.

People’s medicines were managed safely by staff although we identified some improvements could be made such as checking medicines were stored at safe temperatures.

People were supported by staff who the provider checked were suitable to work with them. In addition there were enough staff to care for people.

People were encouraged to live healthy lives and received food of their choice. People received support with their day to day healthcare needs.

People received care in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff received training on the Act to help them understand their responsibilities in relation to it.

Staff understood people’s needs and preferences and people were encouraged to maintain their independence. Staff maintained people’s dignity and treated them with respect. People were encouraged to maintain relationships with those who were important to them.

People’s needs and preferences were assessed by the provider. People’s care plans were sufficiently detailed to inform staff about people’s needs and to guide staff in caring for them. People’s care was planned and delivered in response to their needs.

People were informed how to complain and the provider responded to complaints appropriately. The provider communicated openly with people and staff. Although the provider worked closely with professionals a social worker told us they sometimes experienced delays in communication and information provided was not always comprehensive which hindered co-working.