You are here

Archived: Co-operative Terrace Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 March 2016

Care Homes for Adults with Disabilities (CHAD) Limited – Cooperative Terrace is a residential care home set in a two storey terraced house in West Allotment. The service provided accommodation, care and support to one adult with a brain injury. This inspection took place on the 15 January 2016 and was announced.

We previously inspected Cooperative Terrace in April 2014, at which time the service was compliant with all regulatory standards.

The service had 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.

The person using the service told us that they felt safe with the support from the care staff. Policies and procedures had been recently reviewed and amended. There were safeguards in place to protect people from harm and to ensure staff understood their responsibilities.

Records were kept regarding incidents and accidents. These were investigated and reported on as necessary in a timely manner. Analysis by the registered manager was used to review care needs, risk assessments and implement preventative measures.

The service managed risks associated with the health, safety and wellbeing of the person who used the service, including carrying out regular checks of the premises and equipment in line with their legal responsibilities as the landlord. Individual care needs had been assessed for all aspects of the person’s life and we saw evidence which demonstrated this was reviewed and monitored regularly.

Medicines were managed safely and medicine administration records were detailed and accurate. Medicine was stored safely and securely. The staff followed strict guidance regarding the receipt, storing and disposing of medicine. All other records relating to the management of the service were well maintained.

We saw there were enough staff employed to manage the service safely and to meet the person’s needs. Staff files showed the recruitment process was robust and staff had been safely recruited. Training was up to date and staff had a mix of skills and experience. Opportunities were given to staff to progress their career and achieve qualifications in health and social care.

The directors of the company one of whom was also the registered manager took turns to carry out staff supervision and appraisals which were regular and recorded. Staff and relative meetings were also held regularly and minutes were noted. This demonstrated that everyone had the opportunity to speak to the managers and raise any issues. Competency checks were undertaken by senior care staff to assess the staff’s suitability for their role.

There was evidence to show the registered manager and staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and their responsibilities. The service assessed mental capacity and reviewed it as necessary. Care records showed that wherever possible the person had been involved in making some decisions, but more complex decisions that were made in the person’s best interests’ had been appropriately taken with other professionals and a relative involved.

Staff supported the person to prepare nutritious, well-balanced meals. We observed the person enjoyed their food at mealtimes. The person had choice around mealtimes and often ate the planned meal from the menu, however we also saw evidence that they could choose different items if they preferred.

Staff displayed kind, caring and compassionate attitudes and the person told us all the staff and managers were nice to them. We observed the person was treated with dignity and respect and that the staff were pleasant and friendly.

The registered manager and staff had built a person centred care plan for the person using the service. Individual needs h

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 17 March 2016

The service was safe.

Safeguarding procedures were in place and these were followed correctly by the registered manager and staff team.

Risk assessments were in place to ensure safety. Care needs had been assessed and control and preventative measures were in place with instructions for the staff to follow.

Staff recruitment was safe and robust. Enough staff were employed to meet the needs of the service.

We saw evidence that the person received their medicines in a safe and timely manner.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 March 2016

The service was effective.

Consent was sought in relation to care and treatment. As the person did not have the capacity to make their own decisions about their care, the registered manager had documented evidence of best interest�s decision making in line with the Mental Capacity Act.

Staff were suitably qualified, with a mix of skills, knowledge and experience. They were supported by the registered manager through regular supervision and appraisal.

The person was happy with the service which supported them to maintain a balanced diet.

Records were kept in care plans of input by external healthcare professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 March 2016

The service was caring.

Staff displayed positive, kind, caring attitudes and interacted well with the person. They understood and responded well to their needs.

Staff were knowledgeable about the person; their abilities, behaviour and life history.

There was plenty of choice around food, drinks and activities. Staff involved the person in making decisions about their care and support.

Staff had an understanding of equality and diversity and acted with dignity and respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 March 2016

The service was responsive.

Care records were person-centred and health and social care needs were assessed. Reviews were carried out regularly by a keyworker.

Activities were interesting and meaningful to the person.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people told us they knew how to complain if they needed to. The registered manager held a record of complaints and incidents which were investigated and dealt with appropriately and in a timely manner.

The registered manager regularly sought feedback from staff and relatives at meetings.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 March 2016

The service was well led.

There was a relaxed atmosphere in the home and the registered manager had a clear vision about the direction of the service.

Staff told us they had confidence in the registered manager.

The registered manager demonstrated good governance. There was a robust set of management records to monitor the safety and quality of the service.

Audits were regularly carried out to ensure staff complied with their responsibilities and that the person received the care and support they required.

Stakeholders were consulted to obtain feedback and we saw evidence that this was used to improve the service.