Archived: Blossom Community Care

As part of this inspection we spoke with the four people who lived at Blossom House, two members of staff and a member of the clinical team at the London Borough of Enfield who was responsible for the treatment of some of the people living at the home. We also reviewed records relating to the management of the home which included three care plans, daily care records, records about the management of medicines and records about how the home monitors its own performance and the quality of care.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and staff told us, what we observed during the visit and what we saw in the records we looked at.

Is the service safe?

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people living at the home on the day of our visit.

The people living at the home needed medicines daily. These were managed safely by the staff at the home.

Staff understood the risks involved in providing support for people and there was clear information to enable them to manage these risks. Clear plans were in place for dealing with other foreseeable emergencies.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which apply to care homes. Whilst no application had needed to be submitted to relevant authorities, staff had been trained on the requirements of the mental health legislation and knew when applications should be made.

Is the service effective?

The people we spoke with said they were happy living at the home and that being there was helping them. One person said 'it's good. I am happy here.' Another person told us 'the staff are good. They help you with things like keeping your benefits.' The care plans we looked at showed that support was provided in line with people's assessed needs. Other professionals involved with the care of people living at the home told us that home was effective in helping people make improvements in their lives.

Is the service caring?

We saw that the staff cared about the people they supported and treated them with courtesy and respect. Staff referred to people using their title and surname and it was clear that people felt comfortable with the staff on duty on the day of our visit.

Is the service responsive?

We saw from the files that goals had been set about helping people work towards greater independence where appropriate and to develop their interests and involvement within the community. Care and support plans were modified when people's needs changed. We saw that staff listened to people's concerns and wishes and took action accordingly.

Is the service well lead?

The service was led by a manager who ensured staff received proper training and support. There was a strong focus on the development of systems of good governance and quality control to ensure the service provided effective care.

People who use the service were positive about the support they received from staff at the home. They confirmed that staff assisted them when they needed support and staff were helpful. One person commented that the quality of care was 'very good.' People told us they were satisfied with the way staff supported them to attend healthcare appointments and meetings with mental health professionals.

People told us that they felt safe with the staff who supported them. One person told us 'the staff are fine.' Another person commented 'I haven't got any concerns.'

People told us they were happy with the design and layout of the home and we saw people's rooms had been decorated to their own individual preferences. Each person's room was lockable to ensure people's privacy. One person commented 'I feel relaxed having my own space.'

The service had appropriate recruitment procedures in place and staff were receiving regular support through individual supervision sessions and training appropriate to their roles and responsibilities. People told us they had no concerns about staffing levels at the home.

People told us they were offered choices in relation to how they wanted to be supported. They told us that they had regular meetings with their key worker to talk about their care and that they could comment on how the service was run as well as make suggestions for improvement. They confirmed that staff assisted them when they needed support and staff were helpful. One person told us,' I'm happy here.' The service had developed a number of regular audits in order to keep people safe and to gain their views and the views of other people involved in their care.

Care plans detailed how people were to be supported. However we found that healthcare appointments and planned activities had, on occasion, been missed.

People we spoke with told us they felt safe with the staff who supported them. However we found that staff were not always receiving the support they needed through training, supervision or appraisals. Staff recruitment procedures were not always being followed appropriately.