You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The inspection took place on 4 April 2018 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in February 2017 we found the provider was not meeting legal requirements in three areas. These related to management of medicines, supporting and training staff, and governance arrangements. We asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions, safe, effective and well-led to at least good. At this inspection we found they had made improvements and were meeting legal requirements.

Cherry Garth is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to two people. The home is a bungalow with two bedrooms, two bathrooms and a communal lounge and dining kitchen with an enclosed garden. At the time of the inspection one person was using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

The person who used the service told us they felt safe, and received good care and support. They were very complimentary about the staff who supported them and had a good relationship with the registered manager. Care planning and risk assessment was focused on the person and ensured their needs were identified and met. Activities were person centred. Systems were in place to make sure the person’s health and nutritional needs were met. Choice was promoted and the person was involved in making decision about their care and support.

Staffing arrangements ensured the person received appropriate support from consistent workers. Staff received training and supervision to help make sure they understood their role and responsibilities. Recruitment checks were carried out before staff commenced employment such as proof of identity and criminal record. The provider obtained references but we found, for one member of staff recently appointed there were discrepancies with dates from referees and information provided in the application form. The registered manager followed these up promptly.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor the service. Everyone was encouraged to share their experiences to help improve the service. The person who used the service said they did not have any concerns about the service and would feel very comfortable raising any issues with their keyworker, the registered manager or the senior management team who they said visited frequently.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was safe.

The staffing arrangements ensured people were safe and their needs were met.

Risk to people who used the service was assessed and managed.

Systems were in place to manage medicines safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were supported in their role and received training that equipped them with the knowledge and skills to carry out their job effectively.

Choice and decision making was promoted.

Systems were in place to make sure health and nutritional needs were met.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was caring.

The person was very complimentary about the care they received and said they were treated with respect.

Staff were confident the service provided a very person centred service.

Information to help keep people informed was accessible.

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was responsive.

The care planning process was person centred.

Social activities enabled the person to live a fulfilling lifestyle.

Systems were in place to deal with complaints and concerns.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was well led.

Everyone was given opportunity to share their views about the service.

The registered manager was knowledgeable about the service.

The provider had systems in place for assessing the quality of the service.