You are here

Grosvenor Park Community Project Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 3 August 2018

Grosvenor Park Community Project is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Grosvenor Park Community Project can accommodate five people across two floors. At the time of this inspection, four people were using the service.

This inspection took place on 4 and 11 June 2018 and was announced. At the last inspection in August 2016, the service was rated as overall Good but we found two breaches of the regulations. This was because the systems to protect people from the risk of financial abuse were not sufficiently robust and medicines were not always recorded correctly. We also recommended that surveys are carried out in a systematic manner to enable the service to learn and develop from the survey results. During this inspection, we found improvements had been made.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures. The provider had safe recruitment processes in place. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Risk assessments were carried out to mitigate the risks of harm people may face at home and in the community. People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection. The provider analysed incidents and used this information as a learning tool to improve the service.

People’s care needs were assessed before they began to use the service to ensure the provider could meet their needs. Staff were supported with regular supervisions and annual appraisals to ensure they could deliver care effectively. People were provided with support by suitably trained staff. Staff supported people to eat a nutritionally balanced diet and to maintain their health.

The provider and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the need to obtain consent before delivering care. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff described how they developed caring relationships with people and demonstrated they knew what people’s individual care needs and preferences were. People were included in the care planning process. Staff were knowledgeable about equality and diversity. People were supported to maintain their independence and their privacy and dignity was promoted.

Care records were personalised, contained people’s preferences and were goal focussed. The provider reviewed people’s care records regularly to ensure care was delivered appropriately. Staff understood how to deliver a personalised care service. The service had a complaints procedure and kept a record of compliments.

People and staff spoke positively about the registered manager. The provider had systems in place to obtain feedback from people and professionals about the quality of the service in order to make improvements where needed. People were involved through regular meetings in how the service was run. Staff had regular meetings to keep them updated on care practice. The provider carried out quality assurance checks to identify areas for improvement. The provider worked jointly with other agencies to share good practice.

We have made one recommendation about medicines management. Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 3 August 2018

The service improved to Good. The provider had taken appropriate action to ensure medicines were managed safely and people�s finances were safeguarded.

Staff knew what actions to take if they suspected a person was at risk of harm. People had risk assessments in place to mitigate the risks they may face. Building and fire safety checks were carried out to ensure people�s safety.

The provider had safe recruitment processes in place. There were enough staff on duty to meet people�s needs. People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection. The provider kept records of accidents and incidents to enable lessons to be learnt.

Effective

Good

Updated 3 August 2018

The service remains Good.

Caring

Good

Updated 3 August 2018

The service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 3 August 2018

The service remains Good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 3 August 2018

The service remains Good.