• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Old Registry

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

70 Aldborough Road South, Seven Kings, Ilford, Essex, IG3 8EX (020) 8590 7076

Provided and run by:
Mr Alan Philp

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

2 October 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 2 October 2017 and was announced. At our last inspection in January 2015, we found the provider was meeting the regulations we inspected and the service was rated “Good”. At this inspection we found that the service continued to be rated “Good”.

Old Registry provides personal care and accommodation to nine adults with a learning disability. At the time of our visit, nine people were using the service.

There was 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.

People told us they felt safe using the service. The provider had safeguarding policies and procedures in relation to safeguarding people.

People received individualised care and support that met their needs. There was guidance for staff on how to manage risks to people and how to keep them safe.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs and recruitment processes were safe. Staff received training, supervision and support to give them the necessary skills and knowledge to help them care and support people effectively.

People were supported to have their medicines safely. They were treated with dignity and respect and were able to make choices. They were also involved in making decisions about their care and support needs.

Staff understood and protected people’s legal rights. The provider had suitable arrangements for obtaining consent, assessing mental capacity and recording decisions made in people's best interests.

People were able to attend activities and social engagements of their choice. Visitors were always welcomed at the service.

The provider had a range of effective audit and quality assurance procedures in place. These were used as a means of identifying areas for improvement and also where good practice had been established.

People and their relatives told us they found the staff and management approachable and knew how to raise complaints and concerns.

27 January 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 27 January 2015 and was unannounced.

At our last inspection on 10 April 2014 we found the service was meeting the regulations we looked at and did not identify any concerns about the care and support people who lived at Old Registry received.

Old Registry provides personal care and accommodation to eight adults with a learning disability.

There is 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.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. People were cared for in an environment that was safe. The equipment at the service had been well maintained and serviced regularly. The staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). They were aware of how to support people who could not make decisions for themselves when required.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard. The staff had received training to meet the needs of the people living in the service.

Care and treatment were planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Staff spoke to people with respect and they had a good understanding of each person's personality and needs. They had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and quality assurance processes were in place.

People who used the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views and they were acted on.

10 April 2014

During a routine inspection

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask;

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. People told us that they were happy with the care that had been delivered and their needs had been met. It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of the people's care and support needs and that they knew them well. One person told us 'I like it here and the staff are good'.

Is the service caring?

People were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. People were given opportunities to express their choices and to make decisions in their daily lives. We observed members of staff interacting with people using the service in a courteous, polite and efficient manner.

Is the service responsive?

Records confirmed people's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes. People had access to activities that were important to them and had been supported to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives.

Is the service well-led?

There were systems in place to monitor how the home was run to ensure people received a quality service. People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

31 May 2013

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we spoke with three people using the service, and the representatives of two people who could not talk with us. One person using the service said, "I like living here. It is the best place to live and I have a nice bedroom with all my music and videos". Another person told us, "I like to do art and pottery, and I do my laundry with the staff. The food is good". Both representatives told us they were pleased with the service and thought the quality of care was good. One representative said, "X always appears to be happy and looks well cared for. The staff are nice and helpful".

People, or their representatives, were provided with appropriate information in order to make informed decisions about their care.

People's needs were fully assessed and they were provided with care and support to meet these needs. Risk assessments were in place for identified areas of risk, which meant that people were supported safely.

Systems were in place to manage medicines safely. There were suitable levels of staffing to provide care and support within the Old Registry and support people to access facilities within the community.

People using the service and their representatives were provided with guidance about how to make complaints.

23 January 2013

During a routine inspection

People told us that they were happy living at Old Registry. They said that staff treated and supported them well with their activities of daily living, their social activities and care. One person told us 'I really like it here. I have all my favourite things in my room and go out often with the staff support.' Another told us 'staff are nice, they help you do whatever you want to.' We asked one person about their care and treatment and they gave us the 'thumbs up' with a smile as a response. We understood that this meant that they were happy. There were seven people using the service at the time of our visit and they were all happy and comfortable in their home.

We found that people were well-supported and involved with their personal and health care. They were also supported and involved in the community regularly and they looked forward to this. People were supported to take part in various activities within a risk management framework that promoted their safety and independence.

The provider monitored the service regularly, had a robust recruitment strategy and had appropriate arrangements in place to safeguard people who use the service from abuse.