We carried out a review of the data available to us about Cardinals Way on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Cardinals Way, you can give feedback on this service.
72 Cardinals Way is a care home registered for three people living with enduring mental health and associated needs. There were three live in care workers who rotated with other live in care workers. There were shared bathroom facilities, a communal lounge a large kitchen with a dining area and a small garden with access through the lounge adjacent to the kitchen.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Staff understood their responsibility to protect people in their care from abuse and report any concerns they had. They knew how to recognise and report any concerns they had about people's safety and welfare.
Systems were in place to make sure there were enough suitable staff to support people at different times of the day. Staff received the support, training and guidance they needed to provide people with personalised care.
People received the support they needed to take their medicines.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
There were caring and considerate relationships between people using the service and the staff that supported them. The ease with which people communicated was evident in all interactions we observed during this inspection and by what people told us.
The service demonstrated how well they provided for person centred care that was tailored towards each person’s specific needs. Improving people’s independence and experience of day to day life was at the centre of the way the service worked with people and had resulted in notable improvements to how people lived their lives. People were supported to maintain positive mental health, having each previously experienced prolonged mental ill health.
The provider had systems in place to manage and resolve complaints. People knew how to make a complaint and told us about who they would speak with if they wanted to raise anything.
The provider maintained diligent oversight of the service, identified and responded to care and other day to day matters as these arose.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 29 July 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection on 9 April 2015 the service was rated as good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People were kept safe from harm and staff knew what to do in order to maintain their safety. Risks to people were assessed and their medicines were safely managed. The provider’s staff recruitment procedures ensured that staff were safe to work with the people using the service.
Care workers were well trained and had completed an induction programme before starting at the service. Staff were supported through supervision and were trained to support people.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service also support this practice. The service operated effective procedures for assessing people’s mental capacity and complied with the regulations of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
People received on going healthcare support from a local GP and regular visits to the service were undertaken by other health and social care professionals.
People’s dignity and privacy was maintained and staff knew how people preferred to be supported. Independence was promoted and people were encouraged to do as much for themselves as possible. People were given information on how to make a complaint and how to access advocacy services. No complaints had been received.
The registered manager carried out regular audits of the service and used these as a means of maintaining high quality care. Any action that was required was taken and the service provider was open and transparent in the way that they communicated with people.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
We carried out an unannounced inspection on the 9 April 2015. This is the first inspection undertaken by the Care Quality Commission. Cardinals Way provides care and support for two adults with mental health difficulties and associated needs. There are two live in care workers staying at the service at all times. There are bathroom facilities, a communal lounge a large kitchen with a dining area and a small garden with access through the kitchen.
There was a registered manager in place at the time of the inspection. 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.
We found that Cardinals Way provided a personalised, person-centred service in which people were in control of their support and participated in decision-making for themselves and the service. People were encouraged and enabled to be more independent and there was a clear ethos and culture to promote recovery.
Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding adults’ procedures and keeping people safe. They knew how to recognise and report concerns appropriately and understood how to ‘Whistle blow’.
Medicines were stored and administered correctly and staff had completed the appropriate training to ensure they were competent to administer medicines safely.
Risk assessments and care plans for people using the service were effective; they were individual and recorded all the required information. People and their relatives were involved in the care planning process and outcomes they were working towards were realistic and recorded in a simple, pictorial format that was easier for people to understand.
People consented to their care and treatment and staff had a good understating of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS exist to protect the rights of people who lack the mental capacity to make certain decisions about their own wellbeing. Services should only deprive someone of their liberty when it is in the best interests of the person and there is no other way to look after them, and it should be done in a safe and correct way.
Care workers were well trained and staff had all undergone an induction programme before starting at the service. They each received regular one to one supervision, with a strong emphasis on reflective practice and learning.
People had access to healthcare services and received on-going healthcare support from a local GP and regular visits to the service were undertaken by visiting professionals. Reviews of people’s mental health and healthcare were also undertaken by the multi-disciplinary team.
People’s dignity and privacy was maintained. They were supported with personal care and other tasks and were encouraged to do as much for themselves as possible in order to maintain and increase their independence.
Care plans were detailed and covered areas relating to personal care, social interaction, life histories, mental health, activities and financial matters. We saw evidence that people who used the service and their relatives were involved in planning their care.
People were given information on how to make a complaint and how to access advocacy services. No complaints had been received and one compliment was recorded from a relative, praising the staff team for the improvement seen in the wellbeing of their family member since they had been living at the service.
The registered manager conducted regular audits at the service including random spot checks to ensure the service was delivering high quality care. Actions were carried through and discussed with the staff team for learning and improvements.