You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 March 2018

This comprehensive inspection took place on 4 January 2018 and was unannounced. At our last inspection in July 2016 of the service we found a breach of Regulation12 Safe Care and treatment of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.This was because records relating to the safe management and administration of medicines were not always accurate or completed in full.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question safe to at least good. At this inspection we found that the provider had completed those actions we found the service was meeting the fundamental standards of quality and safety.

The Garden Site is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The Garden Site is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to eight adults with learning disabilities and or autism. The provider had recently submitted an application to vary their registration to accommodate four adults. On the day of this inspection there were three people living in individual properties on the site. The service is situated near the town of Kirkby Lonsdale.

There was 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.

Medicines were being administered and recorded appropriately and were being kept safely.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs. Staff training was on going and people had received sufficient training to safely support and care for people. Staff were supported by the registered and deputy manager through regular staff meetings, supervision and appraisals.

We saw that the service worked well with a variety of external agencies and health professionals to provide appropriate care and support to meet people’s physical and emotional health needs.

Where safeguarding concerns or incidents had occurred these had been reported by the registered manager to the appropriate authorities and we could see records of the actions that had been taken by the home to protect people.

When employing fit and proper persons the recruitment procedures had included all of the required checks of suitability.

People’s rights were protected. The registered manager was knowledgeable about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were only deprived of their liberty if this had been authorised by the appropriate body or where applications had been made to do so.

Hazards to people’s safety had been identified and managed. People were supported to access activities that were made available to them and pastimes of their choice.

People’s dignity and privacy were actively promoted by the staff supporting them.

People were treated with respect and their relatives made very positive comments about the staff team who supported them.

Auditing and quality monitoring systems were in place that allowed the service to demonstrate effectively the safety and quality of the provision.

The focus of the service was on promoting people’s rights. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the leas

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 March 2018

The service was safe.

Prescribed medicines were managed safely and stored safely.

People were safe and well cared for.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 March 2018

The service was effective.

Relevant people were involved where people lacked capacity to consent.

Staff had received the appropriate training to fulfil their roles.

Care plans and records showed that people were seen by appropriate professionals, when required, to meet their physical and mental health needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 March 2018

The service was caring.

Staff were respectful and friendly in their approaches.

Staff demonstrated good knowledge about the people they were supporting and knew their likes and dislikes.

People's dignity was respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 March 2018

The service was responsive.

We saw there were activities which people took part in and people were encouraged to be independent.

Care plans were person centred containing details about people’s preferences, goals and wishes.

Well-led

Good

Updated 5 March 2018

The service was well led

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

People living at the service and their relatives were able to give their views and take part in meetings and discussions about the service.