You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 4 January 2018

This was Options Beach Road first inspection since registering after being taken over by a new company with the Care Quality Commission.

The inspection took place on 1 November 2017 and was unannounced. Options Beach Road provides care and accommodation for up to five people with learning disabilities who may challenge 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.

We met and spoke to all five people during our visit. People were not all able to fully verbalise their views and used other methods of communication, for example pictures. Due to people’s needs we spent a short time observing people. A relative said; “[…] is very cared for their. They love him as much as we do.” Another relative said; “Very safe and well looked after.” Healthcare professionals commented that when they visited the person they oversaw they always looked happy and comfortable, particularly with their key worker.

Staff had completed safeguarding training and staff had a good knowledge of what constituted abuse and how to report any concerns. Staff knew what action to take to protect people against harm and were confident any incidents or allegations would be fully investigated.

People had either one to one staffing or two to one staffing when they went out of the service. Staff confirmed there were sufficient staff to meet these requirements. Staff had completed suitable training and had the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. New staff completed an Induction programme when they started work and staff competency was assessed. Staff also completed the Care Certificate (A nationally recognised training course for staff new to care) if they did not have any formal care qualifications. Staff confirmed this training looked at and discussed the Equality and Diversity policy of the company. People were protected by safe recruitment procedures to help ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

All significant events and incidences were document and analysed. Evaluation of incidents was used to help make improvements and keep people safe. Improvements helped to ensure positive progress was made in the delivery of care and support provided by the staff. Feedback to assess the quality of the service provided was sought from relatives, professionals and staff.

People’s risks were assessed, monitored and managed by staff to help ensure they remained safe. People’s safety was paramount. The registered manager and registered provider had an ethos of honesty and transparency. This reflected the requirements of the duty of candour. The duty of candour is a legal obligation to act in an open and transparent way in relation to care and treatment. The registered manager notified the Commission of significant events which had occurred in line with their legal obligations. For example, regarding safeguarding concerns, and injuries.

People lived in a service which had been designed and adapted to meet their needs. People lived in an environment that was clean and hygienic. The environment had been assessed to ensure it was safe and meet people’s needs. The service was monitored by the registered manager and provider to help ensure its ongoing quality and safety. The provider’s governance framework, helped monitor the management and leadership of the service, as well as the ongoing quality and safety of the care people were receiving.

People lived full and active lives and were supported to access a wide range of activities that reflected people’s interests and individual hobbies. People were given the choice of meals, snacks and drinks they enjoyed while maintaining a healthy diet. People had i

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 4 January 2018

This service was safe.

People told us they felt safe. People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

People received their medicines as prescribed. People’s medicines were administered and managed safely and staff were aware of best practice.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of suitable, experienced and skilled staff.

Risks had been identified, assessed and managed appropriately. Risk assessments had been completed to protect people.

People were protected by the provider’s infection control policies. People lived in a clean and hygienic environment that had been updated to meet people’s needs.

People’s safety was important. If things went wrong, the provider learnt from mistakes and took action to make improvements.

Effective

Good

Updated 4 January 2018

The service was effective.

People’s equality and diversity was respected.

People’s care and support was based on legislation and best practice guidelines, helping to ensure the best outcomes for people. People’s legal rights were up held and consent to care was sought.

People received individual one to one support from staff who had the knowledge and training to carry out their role.

People could access health, social and medical support as needed and received a co-ordinated approach to these needs.

People were supported to maintain a healthy and balanced diet.

People lived in a service which had been designed and adapted to meet their needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 January 2018

The service was caring.

Staff were caring, kind and treated people with dignity, respect and compassion. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible.

People were involved as much as possible in decisions about the support they received and their independence was respected and promoted. Staff were aware of people’s preferences. If people were unable to be involved advocacy service were involved.

Staff understood their role to help protect people’s equality, diversity and human rights to support people individual needs.

Responsive

Good

Updated 4 January 2018

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care.

People’s complex individual communication needs were effectively assessed and met.

People and families where supported to make comments or raise concerns to help improve the quality of the service.

People and families where supported to record peoples individual end of life wishes.

Well-led

Good

Updated 4 January 2018

The service was well led.

People lived in a service whereby the providers’ caring values were embedded into the leadership, culture and staff practice.

Relatives, professionals and staff spoke highly of the registered manager and management team of the service and company.

The registered manager kept their ongoing practice and learning up to date to help develop the team and drive improvement.

People benefited from a registered manager who worked with external health and social care professionals in an open and transparent way.

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

Relatives and professionals views on the service were sought and quality assurance systems ensured improvements were identified and addressed.