Archived: Religious Services Supported Living North

Updated 19 November 2015

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

We inspected Religious Services Supported Living North from 5 October until 8 October 2015. This was an announced inspection and we let the registered manager know we were inspecting two-days beforehand. This meant that the staff and provider knew we would be reviewing the services that were provided.

The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service, this included notifications and enquiries received by the Care Quality Commission

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we met with five of the people who used the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, the provider’s Quality manager, the service manager, a senior support worker and two support workers.

We looked at two people’s care records, two recruitment records for staff providing personal care, the training chart and training records, as well as records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 19 November 2015

Religious Services Supported Living North is registered to provide personal care to retired clergy of the Jesuit community living at St Wilfred’s presbytery in Preston.

We completed the announced inspection from 5th October to 8th October 2015 in order to have the opportunity to visit both the registered office location in Darlington and where the service was being provided in Preston. We met with five people who used the service although we did not carry out in-depth discussions due to the communication difficulties of some of the people who used the service and the fact we were told some people wanted their privacy.

The service had a registered manager who was based at the location’s registered address in Darlington. There was also a service manager who managed the service on a day to day basis in Preston. 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.

Currently a service manager oversees the domiciliary care service provided at St Wilfred’s and the provider stated they were considering making this person the registered manager as they had day to day oversight of the service. However we saw that communication between the registered manager and the service manager was regular and supportive.

People were protected by the service’s approach to safeguarding and whistle blowing. Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures, could describe what they would do if they thought somebody was being mistreated and said that management listened and acted on staff feedback.

The service had health and safety related procedures, including systems for reporting and recording accidents and incidents. The care records we looked at included risk assessments, which had been completed to identify any risks associated with delivering the person’s care.

Staff were supported to work in a safe manner with training in relation to dealing with emergencies and having the appropriate equipment to carry out their roles. We saw that staff were well trained and supported to deliver care and support to the people using the service and we witnessed caring and positive interactions by the staff team on duty. We saw the service was very caring and focused on providing people with a good service.

The staff undertook the management of medicines safely and in line with expectations.

We saw complaints and concerns were managed effectively by the service and the wider presbytery community to ensure they were addressed quickly and further reported where this was required.

Staff were able to describe how they worked to maintained people’s independence, privacy and dignity. We also saw that in this religious community, the staff and service were highly respectful of people’s spiritual needs and supported people at all times to ensure these needs were met.

People’s care records showed that their needs had been assessed and planned in a person centred way. We saw people and the wider presbytery community were involved in people’s plan of care if this was appropriate.

The service manager and staff we spoke with told us they had attended training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. MCA is legislation to protect and empower people who may not be able to make their own decisions, particularly about their health care, welfare or finances.

The service manager and registered manager had systems to ensure staff were appropriately recruited, trained and supported.

The service had a robust quality assurance programme in place that monitored the quality and safety of the service and we saw that the registered manager undertook robust visits. The service had a service improvement plan where clear actions for improvements were identified and monitored.