You are here

Archived: Redlands Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 18 and 19 January 2015

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced inspection.

The service provides care and support for up to eight people who have a learning disability, a mental health condition or physical disabilities. Some people using the service displayed behaviours that were challenging to others and required interventions from staff to keep them and others safe.

There is a registered manager at Redlands. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

The provider monitored incidents where behaviours challenged and responded promptly by informing the local authority safeguarding team, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), behavioural support team and advocacy agencies.

Staff were knowledgeable about the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and worked with advocacy agencies, healthcare professionals and family members to ensure decisions were made in people’s best interests and documented appropriately

People were not deprived of their liberty without authorisation from the local authority. Staff were knowledgeable about the deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) in place for people and accurately described the content detailed in people’s authorisations.

People were protected from possible harm. Staff were able to identify the different signs of abuse and were knowledgeable about the homes safeguarding processes and procedures. They consistently told us they would contact CQC and the local authority if they felt someone was at risk of abuse. Notifications sent to CQC and discussions with the local authority safeguarding team confirmed this.

Staff received training appropriate to people’s needs and were regularly monitored by a senior member of staff to ensure they delivered effective care. Where people displayed physical behaviours that challenged others, staff responded appropriately by using redirection techniques and only used physical intervention as a last resort. The provider had informed the local authority and healthcare professionals when this was applied.

Staff interacted with people and showed respect when they supported them. Relatives and healthcare professionals consistently told us staff engaged with people effectively and encouraged people to participate in activities. People’s records documented their hobbies, interests and described what they enjoyed doing in their spare time.

Staff supported people regularly to attend various health related appointments. Examples of these included visits to see the GP, hospital appointments and assessments with other organisations such as the community mental health team.

People received support that met their needs because staff regularly involved them in reviewing their care plans. Records showed reviews took place on a regular basis or when someone’s needs changed.

There was an open culture where people told us they were encouraged to discuss what was important to them. We consistently observed positive interaction between staff and people. Management audits showed senior staff frequently visited the service to check care and support was delivered to a good standard.

Inspection carried out on 23 April 2013

During a routine inspection

We looked at four care records, spoke with three members of staff and looked at feedback questionnaires which relatives had completed. Most people who used the service were not able to tell us about their involvement in the care they received due to difficulties with their verbal communication.

During our inspection we observed that staff interacted well with people and involved them in their day to day routines.

Records showed that care plans were kept under review and the service co-operated with external health and social care professionals to promote people's health and welfare. This meant that any changes in people's conditions were identified and appropriate action taken to meet their changing needs.

Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the whistle blowing procedure and said that they would not hesitate to report abuse if they felt it was taking place.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. The manager explained to us that care staff were interviewed and that they were subject to a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) and Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA). Records viewed confirmed this. We were told that staff were now subject to a Disclosure and Barring Service check (DBS)

We spoke with one person who told us that they were pleased with the care they received. They said: "I've got nothing to complain about. I tell a member of staff if I want something different and they change it."

Inspection carried out on 29 August 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that they felt safe and listened to.

Care staff told us that care plans were useful when supporting people. We found care plans were centred on people's needs and reflected the care being provided. One person said "I tell the staff what I want and they help me to do it"

We found the staff to have a good understanding of people's needs. Care staff encouraged people to talk with us and promoted people's dignity and respect.

Care staff were trained appropriately in relation to meeting peoples needs.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)