You are here

Archived: Cintre Severnoaks Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 July 2017

This inspection took place on 25 May 2017 and was unannounced. When the service was last inspected in March 2016 we found two breaches of the regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. The breaches related to safe care and treatment and need for consent. These breaches were followed up as part of our inspection. The service was rated ‘requires improvement.’ in March 2016.

Cintre Severnoaks is registered to provide accommodation for up to seven people who have complex mental health needs. At the time of our inspection the service was providing support to five people.

A registered manager was in post at the time of inspection. 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.

At our previous inspection the provider was not fully adhering to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Although some further work is required we found sufficient improvements had been made. We were advised that the kitchen and pool room were locked overnight. There was no evidence that people had consented to this restrictive practice. The registered manager agreed to review their protocol and ensure that the necessary consideration with people is taken forward as a matter of priority. Apart from this issue the service enabled people to make their own decisions and assisted them to understand the decision making process.

At our previous inspection the provider was not consistently managing medicines safely. We found sufficient improvements had been made.

Staffing numbers were sufficient to meet people’s needs and this ensured people were supported safely. Staff were supported to undertake training to enable them to fulfil the requirements of the role.

Risks to people were assessed and where required a risk management plan was in place to manage an identified risk and keep the person safe.

People were supported by a small experienced team. Enabling relationships had been established between staff and the people they supported. Support plans to enhance people’s independence were promoted by the service and staff members.

A care plan was written and agreed with individuals and other interested parties. At people’s requests some family members attend care plan meetings. Care plans were reviewed regularly and a formal review was held once a year and if people’s care needs changed.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to external health care professionals when required.

Staff described the registered manager as supportive. Comments from people confirmed they were happy with the service and the support received.

There were systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 July 2017

The service was safe.

Medicines were managed safely.

Staffing numbers were sufficient to meet people’s needs and this ensured people were supported safely.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of abuse and knew the correct action to take if they were concerned about a person being at risk.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 July 2017

The service was effective.

People’s rights were in the main being upheld in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff received appropriate support through a supervision and training programme.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to external health care professionals when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 July 2017

The service was caring

We received a number of positive comments from people about the staff.

Enabling relationships had been established between staff and the people they supported.

Staff demonstrated they had a good understanding of people’s individual needs.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 July 2017

The service was responsive.

People received good care that was personal to them and staff assisted them with the things they made the choices to do.

A care plan was written and agreed with individuals and other interested parties.

People undertook activities personal to them.

Well-led

Good

Updated 6 July 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff described the registered manager as supportive.

People were encouraged to provide their views and were actively involved in the decision-making process.

To ensure continuous improvement the registered manager conducted regular compliance reports.