You are here

Archived: Ghulab Ashram Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 September 2016

This inspection took place on 12 August 2016 and was announced. We last inspected this service on 10 June 2014 when we saw that all the regulations checked were being met.

Ghulab Ashram is an extra sheltered housing scheme where people can receive support to live in their own home. At the time of our inspection there were 17 people that received support.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People were happy with the care and support they received and had built up good relationships with the staff that supported them.

People were protected from harm and abuse because staff were knowledgeable about how to keep people safe and the actions they should take if they had any concerns about people’s safety.

People were supported by adequate numbers of safely recruited staff that ensured that people consented to the care they received so that their human rights were maintained.

People received care and support from staff that had the skills and knowledge they needed and that received support and guidance to provide good care.

People were supported to receive their medicines safely and to maintain their health through eating well and ensuring that their medical needs were met.

People were treated with care and respect by staff that understood their cultures and needs.

People were supported to maintain their independence.

People were able to raise their concerns and provide feedback about the quality of the service they received.

The service was well managed by a registered manager that involved people and staff in monitoring the quality of the service and ensuring improvements were made.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 September 2016

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm staff were able to recognise abuse and take the appropriate actions to raise concerns.

Risks to the health and safety of people were known by staff so that they were able to provide safe care and support.

There were sufficient numbers of safely recruited staff to ensure that people�s needs were met safely.

People received support to take their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 September 2016

The service was effective.

People received effective care and support by staff that recognised them as individuals and that worked together to meet people�s needs and expectations.

Staff were provided with on going and appropriate training, support and supervision to provide good care.

People were supported by staff that ensured people were involved in decisions about their care and their human and legal rights were respected.

People were supported with their dietary needs and the service worked with other professionals to ensure that people maintained their health and wellbeing.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 September 2016

The service was caring.

People praised the staff and registered manager for the care and kindness shown and valued the positive relationships they had with them.

Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and promoted people�s choices and independence.

People received a personalised service that ensured their privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 September 2016

The service was responsive.

People received a personalised service that was planned with them.

People's care was kept under continual review and the service was responsive to people's individual needs.

People were actively encouraged to give their views on the service they received.

Well-led

Good

Updated 7 September 2016

The service was well-led.

The registered manager provided leadership so that people received a good quality service.

Staff were motivated and proud to work in the scheme and were involved in improving the service.

Quality assurance systems ensured that the service delivered support that met people�s needs.