Archived: Creative Support - Church Parade

Church Parade provides accommodation for people who require nursing or personal care and services for the treatment of disease, disorder or injury. Church Parade offers an assessment and treatment element of service delivery. This means the service provides therapeutic interventions for people who have complex or difficult to manage behaviours. The location completes ongoing assessments of people’s needs and identifies suitable support plans and appropriate long term support packages, with the aim of moving people into other suitable longer term accommodation.

Church Parade can accommodate up to 4 adults with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection 3 people were living there.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our 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 supported by a staff team who had been recruited safely and who had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff knew how to recognise and report potential abuse and showed a good understanding of how care and support should be provided in order to keep people safe. Risks to the health, safety and wellbeing of people were appropriately identified and managed and were regularly reviewed. There was sufficient staff to respond to people’s needs and support people safely. People’s medicines were stored and managed safely.

People were supported to have their nutritional and hydration needs met and were given choices of food and drink. People were able to choose at what times they ate and drank and were actively encouraged to be involved in the planning and preparation of meals. People were supported by staff who had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and were able to appropriately apply the principles in practice. People had good access to a range of healthcare professionals when required, and staff were able to identify and appropriately respond to any changes to people’s health and well being to ensure that they maintained good health.

People were supported by staff who were friendly and caring and had a good understanding of peoples individual needs, preferences and anxieties. People were consistently involved making decision about their care and support and care was delivered in a way that met the needs of each person living at the location. Staff supported people in a way that maintained their privacy and dignity, and promoted peoples independence.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences, and tailored support to ensure that care was personalised and responsive to the needs of the people living at the home. People were encouraged and supported to be involved in the planning of their care, and relatives felt that they were involved in making decisions and choices about how their family members care was delivered and planned. Peoples concerns and anxieties were quickly responded to by staff and relatives knew how to complain. Relatives expressed confidence that any concern would be dealt with quickly and efficiently by the registered manager.

Staff were well supported by the registered manager and had a good understanding of the ethos, values and aims of the service. The registered manager had appropriate systems in place to monitor the quality of care and information from audits and checks were analysed and used to drive improvement. The registered manager demonstrated a commitment to continue to develop the service.

The three people we met appeared comfortable and settled at the home. Staff proactively engaged with people in communal areas and with people who chose to be in their rooms, to ensure their care and safety.

One person told us they liked living at the home and said, 'The staff are nice'. We saw that staff had professional and positive relationships with people. All the staff we spoke with expressed how much they enjoyed their work and supporting people.

We found people's care was appropriately planned and staff were clear about people's needs and associated risks. Care plans were detailed and gave staff the information they needed to meet people's needs.

Appropriate checks were carried out to ensure staff were safe to work with vulnerable people.

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who used the service and others.

Relatives commented, 'The staff are fantastic', 'X is happy, well looked after and I know they feel safe.' Reports from other organisations said that the home was well run.

Relatives took part in care planning and best interest decisions about care and treatment along with health and social care professionals. People's medication and dietary needs were well met, and some religious and cultural preferences were respected. People took part in their care and activities in line with their abilities, moods and interests. Health conditions, wellbeing and people's safety were closely monitored.

People had flexible support from consistent staff. Staff felt well supported by their line managers, regular meetings and had professional development for their roles.

There were effective systems in place to investigate and learn from safeguarding concerns or incidents, which seldom arose. Relatives had made a few informal complaints which were promptly acted upon.