11 November 2014
During a routine inspection
This inspection took place on 11 November 2014 and was announced. The provider was given 16 hours’ notice because the location was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day; we needed to be sure that someone would be in. This was the first time this service was inspected since it was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in November 2013. At this inspection we found some concerns with elements of the care and support provided. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
The service is a care home providing accommodation for up to four younger adults with learning disabilities that require personal care. Two people used the service at the time of our inspection. The service had a registered manager in place. 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.
Medicines were not correctly recorded and administered and staff had not undertaken training in the safe administration of medicines. The service had not carried out risk assessments for people that used the service. The service had safeguarding procedures in place and staff understood their responsibility with regard to safeguarding adults. There were enough staff working at the service.
Staff did not receive appropriate training and supervision to support them to carry out their role. People were able to make decisions for themselves in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The service had not applied for a Deprivation of Liberty (DoLS) authorisation for a person even though it was required. MCA and DoLS are laws protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves or whom the state has decided their liberty needs to be deprived in their own best interests. People were able to choose what they ate and drank and had enough to eat. People had access to health care professionals.
People were treated with respect and dignity by staff and were able to make choices. The service sought to meet people’s needs in relation to equality and diversity issues.
Care plans were in place for people and staff had a good understanding of how to meet people’s assessed and individual needs. The service had a complaints procedure in place which was accessible to people that used the service.
The service did not have sufficiently robust quality assurance processes in place. People spoke positively about the registered manager. The registered manager told us they did not have enough time to carry out all the tasks required of them which meant some important work was not carried out, such as auditing medication. The service did not notify the CQC of significant events.