• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Uxbridge Road

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

623 Uxbridge Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8HR (020) 8848 0869

Provided and run by:
Care Management Group Limited

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

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 20 March 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

One inspector conducted the inspection over two days.

Service and service type:

This service provides 24-hour care and support to people living in ‘supported living’ setting, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

The service was registered for providing support for up to nine people and nine people were using the service at the time of the inspection. This is larger than current best practice guidance.

However, as seven people lived in a main house and two people lived in a large bungalow annex in the rear garden this mitigated the size of the service having a negative impact overall on people. People lived in individual flats that were made up of a bedroom and en-suite bathing facilities. People shared communal areas, such as a kitchen and living room in the main house and a kitchen and living room area in the annex. The domestic building design fitted in with the surrounding residential area. Staff were not wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit. We needed to be sure that managers would be available to facilitate this inspection.

What we did:

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR) to support out inspection. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We looked at information we held about the service including notifications they had made to us about important events. We also reviewed all other information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority and members of the public.

We spoke with four people who used the service and a relative to ask about their experience of the care provided. We also spoke with three members of care staff, two deputy managers and the registered manager.

We viewed three people’s care records, policies and procedures, records relating to the management of the service, training records and the recruitment records of three care workers.

After the inspection we spoke with four more relatives of people who use the service and two adult social care professionals involved with the service.

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 20 March 2019

About the service:

¿ Uxbridge Road is a supported living service that provides 24-hour care and support to nine adults with learning disabilities, complex needs and mental health needs. A team of care staff supported people during the day and there were two staff on shift during the night.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿ Some aspects of the service did not consistently promote people’s safety. Reasonable actions were not always taken promptly to mitigate risks to people’s safety and well-being when ensuring the care and the management of the use of equipment that was used as part of that care was safe.

because risk assessments were not always updated and reviewed to mitigate risks associated with the environment and equipment they used.

¿ Some sections of people’s care and risk management plans were not always kept up to date. However, staff knew how to support people to reduce the risks to their safety.

¿ Some records of the medicines being stored for two people were not always accurately maintained. The registered manager investigated and addressed these matters promptly.

¿ The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways. People's care and support was person-centred, proactive and coordinated. Support focused on promoting people’s choice and control in how their needs were met. Support and interventions were provided in the least restrictive ways. People were supported to have meaningful opportunities and activities. Staff supported people to access mainstream services and specialist health and social care support.

¿ Staff were aware of people's individual needs and preferences and used their knowledge to deliver person centred care. People and their relatives felt that staff cared and treated them with respect and dignity. Staff were very responsive to people’s needs at any given moment.

¿ Staff could perform their roles effectively as they received training, induction, supervision and support to do so.

¿ Staff supported people to manage behaviours that may challenge others in line with best practice.

¿ The registered manager worked in partnership with health and care professionals and the local community. Relatives, staff and other adult social care professionals told us that the service was managed well.

¿ At the time of the inspection both the halls and stairwells in the main house were being re-decorated. Substantial work was also taking place to refurbish the kitchen in the main house.

Rating at last inspection:

¿ We rated the service “good” at our last inspection. We published our last report on 27 July 2016.

Why we inspected:

¿ This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

Follow up:

¿ We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as

per our re-inspection programme. We may inspect sooner if we receive any concerning information.