Archived: Pelican Court

The inspection was carried out on 8 and 9 June 2015 and was unannounced.

The service provides accommodation for people who require personal care. The accommodation is set over two floors providing support for up to nine adults with learning and physical disabilities and complex communication needs. Some people were not able to communicate using speech and used body language, signs and facial expressions to let staff know how they were feeling. At the time of the inspection support was being provided to seven people, five people were living on the ground floor and two on the first floor.

The service is located in a village within reach of Maidstone and other towns by public transport. There are shops and village amenities within walking distance.

There was a registered manager employed at the service who had been seconded to another department within the organisation at the time of inspection. A deputy manager had been appointed to cover the service whilst the registered manager was away. 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. However Healthcare professionals and a relative told us the service had deteriorated since the registered manager had not been there.

There were not always sufficient staff deployed to meet people’s needs. For example we observed that people had to wait when they wanted a cup of tea as there was insufficient staff to attend to them.

Staff knew people well, with many of the staff having worked at the service for a number of years. However, staff were not always considerate and respectful when speaking about people.

Records relating to recruitment kept at the service did not contain the information required under schedule 3 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, and were not available in the service at the time of inspection.

People received their medicines safely and when they needed them. Staff had not consistently followed safe practice around administering and recording medicines given to people.

People’s food and drink consumption had been recorded on a daily basis. Staff knew when and how to make a referral to a healthcare professional if they had concerns about a person. However people were not actively engaged with making choices about meals.

Potential risks to people in their everyday lives had been identified, and, had been assessed in relation to the impact it had on people. Staff had not consistently followed the risk assessments which were in place for people.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care services. The deputy manager showed that they understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and DoLS. Mental capacity assessments and decisions made in people’s best interest were recorded. At the time of the inspection the deputy manager had applied for both standard and urgent authorisations for all seven people who lived at the service.

There was a relaxed atmosphere in the service between people and staff. People’s life histories had been documented and we observed staff talking to people about their interests. However, people were not supported to participate in a wide range of activities. People had a weekly activity timetable in place but this did not reflect the activities being offered to people.

People told us that they felt safe. Staff had received training about protecting people from abuse, and they knew what action to take if they suspected abuse. The management team had access to, and understood the safeguarding policies of the local authority.

People’s health was monitored and when it was necessary, health care professionals were involved to make sure people remained as healthy as possible.

People’s needs were assessed before moving into the service with involvement from family members, health professionals and the person’s funding authority. Care plans contained detailed relevant information and clear guidance about all aspects of a person’s health, social and personal care needs to enable staff to meet people’s needs.

There were systems in place to review incidents and accidents, which were able to detect and alert the deputy manager to any patterns or trends that had developed.

The deputy manager ensured that they had planned for unforeseeable emergencies, so that should they occur people’s care needs would continue to be met. The premises were maintained and checked to help ensure the safety of people, staff and visitors.

People’s health was monitored and when it was necessary, health care professionals were involved to make sure people remained as healthy as possible.

The complaints procedure was readily available in a format that was accessible to the people using the service. People were able to discuss any complaints with staff through monthly meetings. Complaints were dealt with promptly with all outcomes monitored and recorded.

Staff told us they felt supported by the management team. Staff were trained to meet people’s needs and were supported through regular supervision and an annual appraisal, so they were supported to carry out their roles. People were supported by staff that had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in relation to insufficient numbers of staff and having regards to people’s well-being. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.