The inspection took place on 22 and 23 June 2016. This was an announced inspection.
Cherry Tree Gardens is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support with domestic tasks to people living in an extra care scheme. At the time of this inspection 32 people were using the service.
Care is provided 24 hours a day seven days a week by on site care staff and an emergency call facility. Additional services provided included a bistro, hairdressing salon and organised social activities. The provider is an employee owned social enterprise. The premises are maintained by a housing provider which is a charitable community benefit society.
The service had a registered manager. 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.
We found the provider had breached Regulations 12 and 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because the registered provider did not have accurate records to support and evidence the safe administration of medicines. The provider did not have effective quality assurance processes to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided, and to ensure that people received appropriate care and support.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
We have made a recommendation about care plans.
People told us they felt safe at Cherry Tree Gardens. One person said, “I came here three years ago and it’s the best thing I’ve ever done in my whole life. I feel very safe here.” Another person told us, “Carers are always on hand so that makes me feel safe.”
Staff completed safeguarding training as part of their induction, and this was updated regularly. Staff knew how to report concerns and were able to describe different types of abuse. Staff said they had confidence in the care manager to investigate such concerns thoroughly.
A range of risk assessments had been carried out to help keep people safe. These included assessments of the person’s home environment. Accidents and incidents were recorded in people’s care plans.
Staff completed an induction programme and shadowed more experienced staff before providing care to people on their own. Staff told us they had received enough training for their job role and they felt supported.
People were happy with the care and support they received and spoke positively about the staff. A person said, “The carers are fantastic here. I can’t fault the staff.” A relative told us, “The staff are kind and courteous but they have a laugh and a joke with [family member] as well.”
Each person who used the service had a copy of the ‘service user information guide’ in their care records which were kept in people’s apartments. The information guide contained information about all aspects of the service, including how to make a complaint, how to report safeguarding concerns and how to access independent advice and assistance such as an advocate.
People and relatives knew how to make a complaint. Where complaints had been made these had been dealt with to people’s satisfaction within the timescales in the provider’s policy.
Feedback was sought from people and their relatives every six months. In a recent quality survey 92% of people who responded were ‘very satisfied with the provider.’
Staff described the care manager as approachable and helpful. Staff said they didn’t see much of the registered manager. Some people and staff told us they didn’t know who the registered manager was.