You are here

Archived: Phoenix House

Reports


Inspection carried out on 24 June 2014

During a routine inspection

On the day of our inspection the service supported 48 people who lived in their own apartments at one location. We spoke with the manager and looked in detail at the records for five people and three staff. We also spoke with other staff members and the quality assurance manager. We spoke with six people who used the service and one relative.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask.

The detailed evidence supporting our summary please can be read in our full report.

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood their role in safeguarding the people they supported. There were policies and procedures in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and people were protected. This helped to ensure that people were kept safe.

There was a comprehensive training programme including safeguarding for the staff team. The staff and manager had a good understanding of whistle blowing policies. There was a comprehensive induction process and ongoing learning around safeguarding for the staff team.

Is the service effective?

We found that the service was person centred and staff were aware of peoples choices, preferences and support needs. We found evidence that people and their relatives had been involved in planning the care and support. One person told us, “The carers are really nice, we have fun. The carers do what I need and most of them go the extra mile.”

It was clear from the records we sampled and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of people’s care and support needs and that they knew them well. A member of staff told us, “The managers are really good, they do things straight away.”

Is the service caring?

We saw that people were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that the staff were patient and gave encouragement when supporting people. We observed staff and people together in the communal areas and all the interactions were friendly, polite and very caring. It was clear that people felt comfortable and relaxed. We saw people ask for support which was given quickly and appropriately. One person spoke with us about her carers and said, “They are very good indeed, they are lovely and very respectful.”

Is the service responsive?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care safely and effectively. People had care and support delivered to them in a way they were happy with. There was a process for making complaints. During our visit we observed one person go into the office to raise an issue that was dealt with immediately. A member of staff told us, “It’s nice here. I feel I get loads of training, if I have any problems the managers deal with it straight away.”

Is the service well-led?

All the staff we spoke with told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. The agency was part of a larger organisation. We saw how the agency was checked by the organisation to ensure quality standards were maintained. We saw that there was a clear system of line management and all the staff we spoke with understood how to ask for support and who to report any concerns to.

All the people we spoke with told us that they were very happy with the care that had been delivered and that their needs had been well met. A member of staff said, “They have come a long way, there have been no adverse comments from stakeholders. It’s a very stable situation.”

Inspection carried out on 4 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited Phoenix House on 4 June 2013. During our visit we spoke with two managers, three members of staff and seven of the people who used the service.

The people who lived at Phoenix House received varying levels of personal care and support. Some people only required well being checks, whilst others received a higher level of care and support.

People we spoke with were very satisfied with the level of service provided. One person told us, “I’m treated very well here.” Another person said, “I’ve been here twelve years today and it only seems like yesterday.” People told us the staff treated them with dignity and respect and asked permission before carrying out personal care. They confirmed staff turned up on time and delivered care as they wished. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about people’s needs and what support they required.

Staff we spoke with knew what they would do to keep people safe if they observed or suspected abuse. We saw there was an effective recruitment procedure that ensured staff were both suitable and competent to meet the needs of people who lived at Phoenix House.

We saw there were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and to gain the views of the people who lived there.

Inspection carried out on 8 June 2012

During a routine inspection

We visited Phoenix House on 8 June 2012. No one knew we would be visiting.

The care manager was absent on the day of our visit. We spoke with three care staff, the administrator, the regional operations manager and the estates manager for the housing complex.

We spoke with seven tenants who use the service and one relative. Most comments were very positive. The overall impression given was that tenants appreciated the way the service enabled them to maintain their independence whilst giving them security of knowing that someone was available to help. One tenant said, "I am left to be as independent as I can, but have the security of the bleeper." Another tenant told us, "They help me with what I need and allow me to get on with my life."

We also had comments from tenants regarding greater stability since the arrival of the current manager. "Claire is the fifth manager - things have settled since her arrival", and "so much better now - far less agency staff." One long-time tenant noted "There are more familiar faces which has to be good, especially for those with Alzheimer's." They also commented, "I have had my concerns in the past, but things are much better now."

Other typical comments were "no problems - been here over two years", "all very comfortable", and "familiar faces."

One concern expressed to us was outside the scope of the care offered, in that one tenant came to the communal area for a cup of tea, but there was no-one there to provide one for them at that point.

One tenant had alleged that a person had pushed them. The incident had been promptly referred to safeguarding.

We were aware there had been major concerns regarding the safe administration of medication. The provider had acted promptly and taken actions to address the issues. Processes had been put in place that should ensure that medication is given safely.

There were detailed recruitment and selection processes in place for new staff.