11 January 2016
During a routine inspection
This inspection took place on 11 January 2016 and was announced.
14 Beaconsfield Villas is a supported living scheme where people live in their own home under a tenancy agreement, and is registered to provide personal care. People received personal care or social support in order to promote their independence. The support provided was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and enable the person to be as autonomous and independent as possible. 14 Beaconsfield Villas has up to five people with a learning disability living in the service.
At the time of the inspection there were five men living in the service whose behaviour can be complex. People have single bedroom accommodation and a range of communal facilities they can use. The service is situated in a residential area with easy access to local amenities, transport links and the city centre.
The service had a registered manager, who was present throughout the inspection, who had been in their current post for a number of years and knew the service well. 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.
The service was going through a significant period of review, where the provider and local stakeholders were looking at the service provision and what was needed and how the service would best be provided in the future.
Care staff were supported to develop their skills and knowledge by receiving training which helped them to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively. However, training records did not fully detail that care staff had been able to attend refresher training to meet the provider’s requirements, plans were in place to promote good practice and develop the knowledge and skills of staff. This is an area in need of improvement.
Relatives told us people were safe in the service. People were supported by staff that were trained in safeguarding adults at risk procedures and knew how to recognise signs of abuse. There were systems in place that ensured this knowledge was checked and updated. Medicines were managed and administered safely. Accidents and incidents had been recorded and appropriate action had been taken and recorded by the registered manager.
Care and support provided was personalised and based on the identified needs of each individual. People were supported where possible to develop their life skills and increase their independence. People’s care and support plans and risk assessments were up-to-date, were detailed and reviewed regularly. One relative told us, “I have no qualms about any of (name) care and treatment. They have always been good to him. (name) is happy there."
Consent was sought from people with regard to the care that was delivered. Staff understood about people’s capacity to consent to care and had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated legislation, which they put into practice. Where people were unable to make decisions for themselves staff had considered the person’s capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and had taken appropriate action to arrange meetings to make a decision within their best interests.
People were supported to eat a healthy and nutritious diet. One relative told us, “He always eats very well. “People had access to health care professionals. They had been supported to have an annual healthcare check. All appointments with, or visits by, health care professionals were recorded in individual care plans. There were procedures in place to ensure the safe administration of medicines.
People were supported by kind caring staff. One relative told us, “I am the most happiest mother in the world. The moment he came to live in the house he seemed very happy. “There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their care and support needs. The number of staff on duty had enabled people to be supported to attend social activities. One relative told us, “They make sure they take people out. It’s wonderful. “
Staff told us that communication throughout the service was good and included comprehensive handovers at the beginning of each shift and regular staff meetings. They confirmed that they felt valued and supported by the registered manager and senior care officer, who they described as very approachable.
Relatives, staff and visiting healthcare professional told us the service was well led. People and their representatives were asked to complete a satisfaction questionnaire to help identify any improvements to the care provided. People had the opportunity to attend regular weekly ‘tenants' meetings’. The registered manager told us that staff carried out a range of internal audits to review the quality of the care provided, and records confirmed this. The registered manager also told us that they operated an 'open door policy' so people living in the service, staff and visitors could discuss any issues they may have.