Archived: Mawney Road

Mawney Road is a care home registered to accommodate and support up to six people with mental health needs, learning disabilities and/or autistic people. At the time of the inspection, five people were living at the home. The home is a semi-detached house with two floors. Each floor has separate adapted facilities.

People’s experience of using this service

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, Right care, Right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

The provider was meeting the principles of Right support, Right care, Right culture. People had choice and control of how their care and support was delivered to them. The values and attitudes of staff and managers encouraged people to be as independent as possible and feel empowered in their daily lives.

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 and relatives told us the home was safe. Staff were trained in how to identify and safeguard people from abuse. There were systems to ensure risks to people were assessed and mitigated against. Medicines were managed safely.

There was a recruitment process to employ staff who were safe to work with people in the home. There were suitable numbers of staff working in the home. Accidents and incidents in the home were reported and lessons were learned to prevent re-occurrence. There were effective procedures to prevent and control the spread of Infections.

Staff completed training to perform their roles effectively. They felt supported by the provider and managers. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet and had access to healthcare services to help maintain their health.

Staff were caring in their approach towards people and respected their privacy and dignity. People developed positive relationships with staff. They were supported to pursue activities that interested them and avoid feeling isolated.

Care plans were personalised to meet the needs and preferences of people. There was a complaints process for people and their relatives to use. People’s communication needs were understood and met. Feedback was sought from people and visitors to help make continuous improvements to the home.

There was a new manager in place, who felt well supported by the provider. The provider’s quality assurance systems helped to monitor the safety and quality of the service and check people received the right support.

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

Rating at last inspection

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good (report published 6 January 2020).

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection to check the service is applying the principles of Right support, Right care, Right culture for people with learning disabilities and/or autistic people.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Mawney Road is a residential service providing care and accommodation to people with learning disabilities and or autism. Mawney Road accommodates up to six people in one building. At the time of our inspection six people were living there.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

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

Systems had been established to safeguard people from the risk of abuse. At our previous inspection we recommended the service review the way risk assessments were updated; at this inspection we found improvements had been made. Individual risks had been assessed, and people were protected from the risk of harm related to their individual support needs. Risk assessments were up to date with the maintenance of the service and to prevent the spread of infection. Medicines were being managed in a safe manner. There were enough staff working at the service and pre-employment checks were carried out on prospective staff. The service learnt from accidents and incidents to provide safe care and support.

Assessments were undertaken to determine people’s needs before they moved into the service. Staff received training to support them in their roles. Staff were provided with ongoing support through supervisions and appraisals and received an induction to enable them to provide effective care and support. People’s nutritional needs were met, and people were supported to try new foods. People received care and support from relevant healthcare professionals. The service took into consideration individual preferences and likes when decorating the home. 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 treated in a caring manner by staff and the staff understood what life was like for people living in the service. People and their relatives were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. Staff understood how to support people in a way that respected their dignity, privacy and promoted their independence.

People received person-centred care that met their needs. People were supported to engage in their local community and participate in activities of their choice. Information was provided to people in an accessible format. People told us they felt able to make a complaint and were confident that complaints would be listened to and acted on. People’s end of life wishes had been explored.

People engaged well with the registered manager. Relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team and said the service was managed well. There were processes in place to manage and monitor the quality of the service provided. The registered manager kept up to date with best practice to ensure a high-quality service was being delivered.

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 25 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.

Mawney Road is a care home for six people with a learning disability. There were six people living at the service at the time of our visit. The premises were spacious and provided accommodation on the ground and first floors.

There was 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.

Staff ensured that people were happy, comfortable and well presented in the service. People's relatives told us that they were satisfied with the support staff provided to make sure people were safe and their needs met. There were always enough staff on shift to support people. The staff recruitment processes were robust and staff were checked before they started work at the service.

Staff communicated well with each other and felt supported by the registered manager. Staff supervision and appraisal sessions enabled staff to review their practices and knowledge and to identify further training opportunities. The training staff received at the service were varied and relevant to the needs of the people who used the service. This ensured, among others, that staff knew adult safeguarding procedures and how to manage medicines safely.

Staff were aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how it applied in practice. They could explain the procedures in place to ensure decisions were made in people's best interests.

People were encouraged and supported to live as independently as possible. The policies and systems in the service allowed people to be supported in the least restrictive way. People's care plans were developed based on their assessment of needs. The risk assessments were regularly reviewed to identify and reduce the possibility of an incident or accident happening to people.

Staff supported people to maintain a healthy lifestyle. People could choose the food they wanted and relatives confirmed that the food was good. People also benefitted from regular medical checks.

There was an open and transparent culture where people, relatives and staff could feel free to share their views and be confident that their concerns or comments could be taken seriously by the registered manager. The auditing and quality assurance systems were used as a tool for continuous improvement of the service. We made one recommendation regarding reviews of risk assessments.

We observed staff interacting with people who lived at the service in a respectful way that met their needs. For instance, one member of staff worked with one person's challenging behaviour in a calm and caring way which put the person at ease. Another member of staff supported someone to put on a top to go out in a calm and patient way.

We found that staff received appropriate professional development and training. The service had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to act where it found this was needed. There were arrangements in place for people to make comments and complaints about the service.

We found that people's care was being delivered in line with assessed need, that appropriate pre employment checks were taking place before staff were employed and that any records kept were fit for purpose and kept securely. We also found that the decoration, fixtures and fittings were old, worn and in need of renewal. The provider had recently carried out an assessment of this and was planning to address this.