You are here

Archived: Marlborough House Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 2 June 2014
Date of Publication: 25 June 2014
Inspection Report published 25 June 2014 PDF

Overview

Inspection carried out on 2 June 2014

During a routine inspection

We met ten people who used the service and spoke with six of these people about their views of the service they were provided with. We also spoke with two people's relatives, the manager and three staff members. We looked at three people's care records. Other records viewed included staff training records, health and safety checks, meeting minutes and satisfaction questionnaires completed by the people who used the service. We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

When we arrived at the service a staff member looked at our identification and asked us to sign in the visitor's book. This meant that the appropriate actions were taken to ensure that the people who used the service were protected from others who did not have the right to access their home.

People told us they felt safe living in the service and that they would speak with the staff if they had concerns. One person said, "I would tell the staff if I was worried."

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. While no applications had needed to be submitted, discussions with the manager showed that they understood when an application should be made, and how to submit one. Staff were provided with training in safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse. This meant that staff were provided with the information that they needed to ensure that people were safeguarded.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they felt that they were provided with a service that met their needs. One person said, "They (staff) have helped me a lot, I am happy."

People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. The records were regularly reviewed and updated which meant that staff were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.

Staff were provided with the training that they needed to enable them to meet the needs of the people who used the service in a safe and effective manner.

Is the service caring?

The staff interacted with people living in the service in a caring, respectful and professional manner. People told us that the staff treated them with respect and kindness. One person said, "They (staff) are lovely people."

People using the service completed satisfaction questionnaires. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

Is the service responsive?

People using the service were provided with the opportunity to participate in activities which interested them. People's choices were taken into account and listened to.

People's care records showed that where concerns about their wellbeing had been identified the staff had taken appropriate action to ensure that people were provided with the support they needed. This included seeking support and guidance from health care professionals, including a doctor and district nurse.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

The service had a quality assurance system and records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving.

The manager had not registered with CQC, however, they told us that they were in the process of making an application with us.