You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

This is the first comprehensive inspection we have carried out since the service registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under a new provider in January 2016. The inspection was unannounced.

La Rosa 2 provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people with mental health needs. At the time of our inspection, four people were using the service.

A registered manager was in post at the time of the inspection. 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 were safe from avoidable harm. Staff had detailed guidance about how to manage identified risks to people’s health and well-being. People received safe care from a sufficient number of staff deployed at the service. Staff knew how to identify and report any concerns and potential abuse to keep people safe.

Appropriate selection and recruitment procedures followed at the service ensured only suitable staff delivered care to people. People received support to take and manage their medicines safely in line with best practice.

People received effective care provided by competent and skilled staff. Staff attended training and refresher courses and had their practice monitored to ensure they maintained their effectiveness to provide care.

Staff upheld people’s right to make choices about care and treatment and respected their freedom in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People received the support they required to maintain a healthy diet. Staff supported people to access a range of health and social care professionals when needed.

People received care and support from staff who were kind and compassionate. Staff encouraged and supported people to maintain relationships that mattered to them. People made decisions about how staff delivered care and support. Staff upheld people’s rights to have their care delivered with respect and to have their dignity and privacy maintained.

People’s needs were assessed and appropriate plans were in place to ensure the care provided met their individual needs. Staff adapted care delivered to people in line with each person’s changing needs.

People enjoyed taking part in a wide range of activities of their choosing for social interaction and stimulation. The provider actively sought people’s views about the service and ensured they acted on feedback received.

People knew the registered manager well and were happy about the management of the service. Staff were valued at the service and felt confident to share ideas about how to improve the service. Effective quality assurance systems ensured a continuous improvement of the service and the care people received. The provider enjoyed close working relationships with external organisations. This enabled the service to deliver care in accordance with best practice guidelines and current legislation.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was safe. People were safe because staff knew how to identify and protect them from abuse. Staff attended safeguarding training to enhance their understanding about dealing with concerns to keep people safe.

Staff followed the appropriate procedures of identifying and managing risks to people’s welfare.

Competent and trained staff managed and administered people's medicines safely in line with the provider’s procedures.

People received care from a sufficient number of suitably qualified staff who were recruited through a robust recruitment process.

Effective

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was effective. People received effective care because staff had the relevant knowledge and skills to undertake their role. Staff received an induction, supervisions and an appraisal to develop their practice.

People consented to care and treatment. Staff promoted people’s freedom and right to make choices about their care.

People‘s dietary needs and food preferences were met at the service.

People received the support they required to access healthcare services when needed to maintain their health and well-being.

Caring

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was caring. People received compassionate care at the service. People were involved in making decisions about their care.

Staff supported people to maintain relationships that were important to them.

People received appropriate support to maintain their independence.

Staff treated people with respect and promoted their privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was responsive. People had their well-being assessed. Care plans contained sufficient detail that enabled staff to provide personalised and responsive care to each person using the service.

People enjoyed taking part in activities of their choosing at the service and in the community.

People understood the provider’s complaints procedure and were confident of a positive resolution of their concerns.

Well-led

Good

Updated 12 August 2017

The service was well led. People using the service and staff made positive comments about the registered manager and the management of the service.

People were at the centre of the decisions made at the service because of an open and transparent culture embedded in staff’s practice.

Regular checks and audits to the quality of the service resulted in an improvement of the care provided to people.

A close working partnership between the provider and external agencies ensured people received a good standard of care.