• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Dimensions 55 Malvern Road

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

55 Malvern Road, Worcester, Worcestershire, WR2 4LE (01905) 421787

Provided and run by:
Dimensions (UK) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

6 August 2014

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which looks at the overall quality of the service.

The inspection was unannounced, which meant the provider and staff did not know we were coming. 55 Malvern Road is a care home that provides personal care and support for up to four people. Care and support is provided to people with learning disabilities.  At the time of our inspection three people lived at the home.

There is a registered manager in post. We saw that they provided good leadership and was very much part of the staff team. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

We spent time with all the people who lived at the home and observed how staff met their needs during the day with support that reduced the risks to people’s health and wellbeing. Two relatives that we spoke with told us that their family members were safe as staff knew how to provide the support that they needed to meet their needs. We saw that this was the case as people received their medicines from staff that had the knowledge to do this and medicines were reviewed in line with any changes to people’s needs.

We found that people were treated as individuals and supported to be involved in all aspects of their life as much as possible. We observed that staff treated people with respect and communicated in a way that included people’s involvement in their care and support. This was evident at meal times and what people wanted to do in their daily lives as staff encouraged people to make their choices. This meant people were not discriminated against due to their needs and people’s independence was supported as much as possible.

Throughout the day we saw staff supported people with words of encouragement where needed when completing tasks. We saw that staff had a good rapport with people and it became evident that the staff knew people’s likes and dislikes. This enabled staff to offer effective care and support to people. This included links with health and social care professionals so that people’s needs were met in the right way, by the right person and at the right time.

Staff knew how to identify harm and abuse and knew how to act to reduce the risk of harm to which included unsafe staff practices. There were also a number of arrangements in place to promote people’s safety and support people in the right way at the right time. For example, there were sufficient staff on duty and staff recruitment checks were carried out before staff came to work at the service.

Staff showed an awareness of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We saw that consideration was given to the Mental Capacity Act as some people did not have the ability to consent to their care and treatment. Therefore best interest decisions had been made with people who knew the person and were involved in their care and support. We also found that the management team and the staff were aware when levels of intervention or supervision may represent a deprivation of a person’s liberty.

Staff had training to enable people to be protected from the risk of infections and the premises were checked so that any repairs and or adaptations were made where needed. During our inspection we saw that the premises were homely, clean and well maintained.

We found that the care and support people received was well led. The registered manager ensured positive outcomes for people were continually developed, reviewed and improved upon when needed.

25 October 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

At the time of our inspection three people used the service. We found that since our previous inspection in June 2013 the provider had made improvements to how they maintained records about people's care and support. This meant that accurate and up to date records were in place for staff to refer to.

24 June 2013

During a routine inspection

When we carried out this inspection three people were using the service.

We spoke with the registered manager, the assistant manager and three support workers. We spent time with two people who used the service. We were unable to speak with people who used the service due to their level of complex needs.

We observed how staff interacted with people. We saw that staff spoke with people in a respectful manner. We observed that people appeared relaxed and comfortable with the care provided.

We saw that people who were using the service were protected from the risk of abuse.

Appropriate checks were carried out before staff commenced employment. Staff had received regular training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to carry out their work.

We found that records did not always contain information showing that concerns about people's health and welfare had been followed up. Care plans lacked detailed information about some identified care needs.

3 January 2013

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we were unable to speak with people who used the service due to their verbal communication difficulties. Whilst at Malvern Road we watched how staff interacted with people while they were in communal parts of the home. We spoke with the registered manager and three members of staff including one who worked for an agency.

We saw staff interacted with people and involved them in their care where possible. People who used the service had taken part in activities in the local community.

We found that staff had a good understanding of the needs of people and that they supported them to meet those needs.

At the time of our inspection we found that people's medication had been administered as prescribed by the prescriber.

Staff received training provided by the provider to assist them in meeting people's needs although this was not always timely. The formal supervision of staff had not been carried out in line with the organisations own procedures in order to support them.

We found that the provider had systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service that people received.