You are here

Archived: Scott's View at South Farm Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 13 July 2017

We inspected Scott’s View at South Farm on 3 May 2017. The inspection was announced.

Scott’s View at South Farm provides care and support for up to five people who may experience learning disabilities, or older people with memory loss associated with conditions such as dementia. It is located in a rural setting on the east coast of Lincolnshire. Two people were living in the home at the time of our inspection. The provider was also the manager of the home. We refer to this person as ‘the provider’ throughout the report.

At our last comprehensive inspection on 9 December 2015 we identified three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2017. This was because medicine arrangements and staff recruitment procedures were not sufficiently robust to protect people. In addition, the provider did not have suitable arrangements in place to effectively monitor and assess the quality of the services people received.

We carried out a focused inspection on 20 May 2016 to check whether the provider had made improvements to the ways in which they managed medicines, recruited staff and monitored the quality of the service. At this inspection we found the provider had made sufficient improvements to the way in which they managed medicines and recruited staff. However, they had not made sufficient improvements to the way in which they monitored the quality of the service. This was a continued breach of Regulation 17 Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2017.

We carried out a further focused inspection on 23 November 2016 to check whether the provider had made improvements to the way in which they monitored the quality of the service. At the inspection we found that the provider had made sufficient improvements to the way in which they monitored the quality of the service to ensure they met the legal requirements.

We did not revise the rating for the key questions ‘Is the service safe?’ and Is the service ‘well-led?’ at our focused inspections as this would require a longer term track record of consistent good practice.

During this comprehensive inspection we found that the provider had maintained the improvements we saw at our focused inspections.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS are in place to protect people where they do not have capacity to make decisions and where it is considered

necessary to restrict their freedom in some way, usually to protect themselves.

The provider acted in accordance with the MCA and understood how to implement DoLS when required. People were supported to make their own decisions where ever possible. When it was not possible the provider ensured that decisions were made in people’s best interests.

People felt safe and well cared for at Scott’s View at South Farm. System were in place to keep people safe and staff understood how to identify and report any safety concerns. We noted one area of the environment which posed a potential risk to people’s safety which the provider took immediate action to rectify.

Arrangements were in place for the safe management of medicines and people were supported to access all of the health care services they required. People were supported to enjoy a varied diet and to eat and drink enough to stay healthy.

There were enough staff available to ensure people received individual support in a timely and appropriate manner. Care plans were in place to guide staff as to how best to meet people’s needs and wishes. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff provided support in a warm and caring manner.

People were able to enjoy a varied social life and had access to a range of meaningful activities. People were encouraged to make use of local amenities and be an active part of the local community.

People who lived in the home and staff members felt able to rai

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 13 July 2017

The service was not consistently safe.

The provider had not ensured that people were protected from the risks associated with unrestricted window openings.

People were protected from the risk of abuse.

Medicines were managed safely.

There were enough staff to ensure people received the care they needed.

Effective

Good

Updated 13 July 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported to make their own decisions where possible. The provider acted in their best interest when this was not possible.

People enjoyed a varied and healthy diet and had access to all of the healthcare they required.

Staff were trained and supported to meet people�s needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 13 July 2017

The service was caring.

Staff supported people in a warm and caring manner.

People�s privacy and dignity were respected and maintained.

People were supported to maintain relationships which were important to them.

Responsive

Good

Updated 13 July 2017

The service was responsive.

People were encouraged to maintain their independence and to exercise choice and control over their lives.

People were supported to maintain their social life and enjoy a range of meaningful activities.

People had individual care plans which reflected the care and support they received.

Systems were in place to manage complaints or concerns effectively.

Well-led

Good

Updated 13 July 2017

The service was well-led.

Systems were in place to audit the quality of service provision and take action to address any shortfalls identified.

People were asked for their views and opinions and were involved in how the home was run.

People were supported to maintain an active role in the local community.