You are here

Archived: Serlby Close Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 March 2016

This inspection took place on 26 January 2016. The inspection was announced to ensure people who used the service would be present.

Serlby Close is an eight bedroomed, purpose built detached property located in Washington. The service provides accommodation and care for up to eight people who have learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorders. At the time of the visit eight people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 people who lived at Serlby Close had complex needs which meant they were unable to tell us about their experience of the service. We spoke to relatives of people who lived at the home to gain their views. Relatives we spoke with expressed positive comments about the service their relatives received and praised the work of the manager and staff.

Relatives and staff we spoke with told us that there were enough staff on duty. During our inspection we observed sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs.

Where risks were identified they were assessed and managed to minimise the risk to people who used the service and others.

Staff were able to describe the signs of potential abuse. Staff we spoke to had a clear understanding of what actions to take if they had concerns about a person’s safety or treatment.

The provider had a robust recruitment procedure in place which included ensuring appropriate checks were undertaken before staff started work.

Medicines records we viewed were up to date and accurate. This included records for the receipt, return, administration and disposal of medicines.

The provider carried out regular health and safety checks included checks of gas safety, electrical safety, electrical appliances, fire safety and water safety.

Staff understood and applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), and were aware of people’s rights when they could not consent themselves. We saw staff support people to make choices and decisions.

People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. We saw that each individual’s preference was catered for and people were supported to manage their weight.

Staff had completed mandatory training required to perform their role. We noted all training was up to date as were supervisions and appraisals.

The provider had a personal emergency evacuation procedure in place which detailed action to be taken in the event of an emergency.

The service worked with external professionals to support and maintain people’s health. We saw evidence in care plans of cooperation between care staff and healthcare professionals including, occupational therapists, podiatrists and GPs.

People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff had a sound knowledge of the people they supported. We saw staff were caring and compassionate when supporting people.

Staff were aware of a person’s preferred method of communication.

People were involved in a wide range of activities including bowling, ice-skating, going to the pub and shopping. Staff supported people to maintain family relationships and links with the local community.

Where people had no family or personal representative we saw the service assisted people to obtain support from an advocacy service.

Care plans were detailed and reflected people’s individual needs. Reviews were regularly completed and included input from the person and their family.

We observed staff were supportive of each other. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the home and they felt supported by the manager and registered manager.

The manager had a comprehensive system to audit various aspects of the running of the service. These included checks o

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 March 2016

The service was safe.

The provider operated a safe and effective recruitment system. All appropriate checks were conducted by head office prior to a person starting work.

Risk assessments were completed individually for people using the service based upon their needs.

Support workers demonstrated a good awareness of safeguarding and the process of reporting concerns.

Medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 March 2016

The service was effective.

Training and development was up to date. Staff told us they regularly attended supervisions and appraisals.

Staff understood and applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and consent.

People were promoted and supported in maintaining a healthy diet.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 March 2016

The service was caring.

We observed staff were kind, caring and compassionate towards the people they supported. Relatives we spoke with told us staff were always respectful.

Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported. They were aware of their preferences, interests and family structure.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 March 2016

The service was responsive.

Care plans were individualised and contained personalised information about the person and their preferences.

The provider ensured activities were constantly available and were planned around people’s preferences.

Relatives we spoke with told us they had no complaints about the care provided at the home and if they had any concerns would approach the manager.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 March 2016

The service was well led.

A strong leadership was evident throughout the home. Staff worked well as a team and supported each other when required.

The provider had an effective quality assurance processes to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided.

Feedback was sought from people, relatives and staff in order to monitor and improve standards.

The provider ensured statutory notifications had been completed and sent to the CQC in accordance with legal requirements.