You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 15 September 2016

The inspection took place on 4 August 2016 and was unannounced. This was a comprehensive inspection.

Cran Dara is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for up to seven people. On the day of our inspection there were seven people living at the home. Cran Dara supports people with learning disabilities; some people also had physical disabilities.

The home had 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.

Staff understood their role in safeguarding people. They had received training and demonstrated a good understanding of how they would protect people from abuse of potential harm. Staff routinely carried out risk assessments and created plans to minimise known hazards whilst encouraging people’s independence.

We found that policies and procedures were in place to keep people safe in the event of emergencies. People had individual plans to keep them safe in the event of an emergency and there were contingency plans in place.

People were administered their prescribed medicines by staff who had received medicines training. Medicines were stored safely and systems were in place to ensure medicine stock could be monitored and audited.

Staff training was tailored to the individual needs of people who live at the home. Staff told us that they had good access to training and people and relative told us that staff were effective in their roles.

Staff provided care in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005). However, we noted one instance where records required updating.

Staff followed the guidance of healthcare professionals where appropriate and we saw evidence of staff working alongside healthcare professionals to achieve outcomes for people.

People told us that they enjoyed the food and we saw evidence of people being provided with choice and also being involved in writing menus.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect. All caring interactions that we observed were positive and staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to respect people’s dignity.

Information in care plans that reflected the needs and personalities of people that we spoke to. People had choice about activities they wished to do and staff encouraged people to pursue new interests.

People were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the care they received through residents

meetings and keyworker sessions. We saw evidence that issues raised by people were responded to by management.

Staff told us that they were well supported by management and had regular supervision. People and relatives told us that they had a positive relationship with the registered manager.

People’s records were kept up to date and stored securely.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 15 September 2016

The service was safe.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities in safeguarding people and understood how to follow procedures to keep people safe.

Risk assessments promoted independence whilst also ensuring people were kept safe from known hazards.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and systems were in place to monitor patterns and respond appropriately.

Contingency systems and emergency procedures were in place in case of emergencies and staff understood how to respond.

Medicines were administered safely by staff who were trained to do so.

Effective

Good

Updated 15 September 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who were trained and knowledgeable about their individual needs.

People were happy with the food served at the home and were involved in writing menus.

Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and people were supported in line with its’ guidance.

Healthcare professionals were involved in assessments and reviews.

Caring

Good

Updated 15 September 2016

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff that knew them well.

People were included in decisions about their care.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 15 September 2016

The service was responsive.

Assessments and care plans were person centred and reflected people’s needs, interests and preferences.

People were supported to engage in activities that were meaningful to them.

A complaints policy and procedure was in place that gave people opportunities to raise any concerns that they might have.

Well-led

Good

Updated 15 September 2016

The service was well led.

Staff told us that they had support from management and we saw evidence that staff feedback was acted upon to improve people’s lives.

People’s feedback was sought by the registered manager in order to improve the care they received.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care and to ensure that people received good care.

Records were kept up to date and stored securely.