The Care Quality Commission
  • Mental Health
  • Independent mental health service

Archived: 3 Gray Street

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

3 Gray Street, Upper Mounts, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 3QQ (01604) 621622

Provided and run by:
Maplyn Care Services Ltd

All Inspections

10 January 2017

During a routine inspection

We rated 3 Gray Street as good overall because:

  • People who use the services had access to support from staff 24 hours a day including up to three hours of individual time for support and guidance.
  • Staff helped people who use the services to achieve independent living and manage their long term chronic mental health issues including substance misuse issues.
  • The environment at 3 Gray Street was visibly clean. The flats were in good decorative order and had new furnishings. Service users were able to personalise their flats.
  • Staff received an induction period and mandatory training, including shadowing a member of staff before completing shifts on their own.
  • There was effective liaison and partnership working between the staff and external professionals at 3 Gray Street and the community mental health teams who were involved with the people who used the services.
  • People who used the services reported that staff were supportive and caring.
  • Staff received regular supervision and de-briefings following serious and untoward incidents.
  • People who used the services actively contributed to their support plans and there was evidence of the collaborative work between the service user and staff working towards personalised goals.
  • The compliance rates for mandatory training for staff were high.

However:

  • People who used the services were unsure about how to access advocacy services and there was no information about advocacy services displayed on the premises.

29 November and 3 December 2013

During a routine inspection

People's health, safety and welfare was protected when more than one provider was involved in their care and treatment, or when they moved between different services. This was because the provider worked in co-operation with other agencies. A health professional who visited the service told us that the staff had been involved in the planning of one person's care before they came to live at the service. This had included staff attending the person's discharge planning meetings and undertaking their own assessments to ensure their health needs could be met by the service. They also told us that the staff provided them with regular updates and feedback about people's health and welfare needs and were notified immediately if the staff had any concerns about their wellbeing.

One person told us that the staff supported them to liaise with other health care providers involved in their care. This included the G.P and their care co-ordinator and these services had helped them to access the support that they required. We also saw copies of staff monthly meetings and saw that staff had discussed how they could liaise with other health professionals involved in people's care. This was to make sure that people received continuity of care and treatment when this was provided by more than one health provider.

1 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We met and spoke with one person in the privacy of their flat. They said the staff were very supportive and were always available when needed. They said they felt safe, were always treated with respect by the staff, and liked having their own self-contained accommodation within the building. They saw living at '3 Gray Street' as a 'stepping stone' back into the wider community and valued the "very good" support they received from the staff team.

The person we spoke with also said that the staff had made them aware of the 'house rules'. For example, people receiving support at '3 Gray Street' have an obligation to look after their flat and be mindful that there are other flats within the building also occupied by people who require support. The person we spoke with said the 'house rules' were fair and reasonable. They said most of the 'house rules' were what anyone living in the wider community would expect their neighbours to abide by, such as avoiding loud music and respecting other people's individuality and rights.