You are here

Narconon United Kingdom Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 October 2016

We inspected Narconon on the 15 August 2016 and the inspection was unannounced. Narconon is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for up to 16 students (adult service users). The purpose of the service is to provide a non-medical detoxification and rehabilitation programme for students who are addicted to alcohol or drugs. Students withdraw from drugs and then take part in a programme of modules with the intention of self-learning. The provider had developed an alternative non-medical/medicated intervention, rehabilitation and care programme for a variety of legal and illegal drugs and alcohol withdrawal.

It should be noted that the only part of the service provided at this location which is registered and regulated by the Care Quality Commission is for ‘accommodation with personal care’ we do not regulate the rehabilitation programme provided or judge their effectiveness.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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 the last inspection in December 2015, we asked the provider to make improvements in relation to the safe recruitment of staff and the organisation of contemporaneous records. The provider sent us an action plan stating they would have addressed all of these concerns by February 2016. At this inspection we found the provider was meeting these regulations and had acted upon the recommendations made.

Before commencing the programme, staff completed pre-admission assessments in partnership with the students to ensure they could safely support the student throughout the programme. Information obtained from the pre-admission assessment formed the basis of the student’s care plan. However, care plans and risk assessments did not consistently reflect the steps required to mitigate potential risks or how to safely manage student’s mental health needs during withdrawal. Where students may have experienced fluctuating capacity during the withdrawal programme, documentation did not consistently reflect how the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 were embedded into the care planning process. Despite concerns with documentation, we saw that students received the care they required. We have made a recommendation for improvement.

Consent was obtained from students before they started their programme. Staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and students were made aware of the restrictions in place before completing the programme.

Students were protected from abuse or harm because staff had been trained to recognise, record and report any concerns. Students confirmed they felt safe during their stay at Narconon. One student told us, “I feel really safe and I’m learning to like myself.” There were enough staff on duty and deployed throughout the home to meet student’s support needs.

Staff had been trained to provide appropriate and safe personal care. They had followed the organisations training programme regarding the modules that students go through after withdrawal. Upon employment with Narconon, all staff members had completed the care certificate. Staff spoke highly about the opportunities for training and professional development. Several staff members were being supported to obtain a diploma in health and social care.

The service had been adapted and redeveloped with a range of facilities and equipment which met the needs of the students. Some staff also lived on site on the top floor. The home was clean and well maintained having been newly developed prior to registration in August 2015. A dog also lived on site and students spoke fondly about having the dog around.

Staff went above and beyond to promote and uphold studen

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 October 2016

Narconon was safe.

Students were protected by the service's recruitment practices and there were enough staff available to meet student�s needs.

Students felt safe during their stay at Narconon. Appropriate checks were made to ensure the environment was safe and fit for purpose. Environmental risk assessments for the sauna area were in place.

Staff understood their responsibilities around protecting students from harm. A robust pre-admission assessment was in place to ensure that the programme would be suitable and safe for students to complete.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 October 2016

Narconon was effective.

Consent was sought before students began their programme.

Staff received training which enabled them to carry out their job roles effectively. Students had access to medical care and attention when needed.

Students were supported to maintain a balanced and nutritious diet. The importance of a healthy meal was recognised and all meals were designed in collaboration with a nutritionist.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 October 2016

Narconon was caring

Staff were caring in their attitudes towards students. Students privacy and dignity was respected, especially during the withdrawal programme.

Staff promoted students equality and diversity. Staff recognised the importance of promoting relationships between students and their families.

Students were complimentary of staff and felt staff had a firm understanding of their needs.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 October 2016

Narconon was responsive

A complaints policy and procedure was in place. Information on how to make a complaint was made available to students.

Students had individual care plans and flight plans. Following withdrawal, students were supported to be independent and maintain life skills.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 5 October 2016

Narconon was not consistently well-led

Documentation did not consistently reflect the information and knowledge held by staff on how to provide safe, effective and responsive care.

Systems were in place to obtain feedback from students, relatives and staff. The visions and values of the service were embedded into practice and understood by staff.