Radis Community Care (Maritime House)

Updated 29 February 2024

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. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by 2 inspectors, a member of the medicines team and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there were two registered managers in post. We have referred to ‘a registered manager’ in this report because we spoke with both registered managers.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced. Inspection activity started on 22 June 2023 and ended on 25 July 2023. We visited the service on 22, 23 and 28 June and 12 July 2023.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We observed interactions between staff a people in communal areas. We spoke with 16 people and 14 relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 10 staff including 7 care staff, the service manager and the two registered managers (regional manager and support manager).

We looked at the care records of 11 people and multiple medication records. A variety of records relating to the management of the service were reviewed. These included policies and procedures, records of accidents or incidents, staff training and quality assurance records. Following the inspection, the registered managers provided us with information and other documents to support our inspection.

Updated 29 February 2024

About the service

Radis Community Care (Maritime House) is an extra care housing service providing personal care to people. The service provides support to people with a range of needs including people living with dementia, older people, younger adults, and those with a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 67 people using the service.

People using the service lived in self-contained accommodation within a large purpose-built shared building of 80 flats close to Portsmouth.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risks to people were not consistently assessed, and risk management plans were not always in place which put people at significant risk. Safeguarding concerns were not always identified or addressed quickly enough to protect people from avoidable harm. There were insufficient staff deployed to ensure people’s needs were safely met. People’s medicines were not managed safely. Infection control risks were not always managed safely. Lessons learnt were not effectively shared when things went wrong to prevent a reoccurrence.

People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. The provider’s policy was not followed by staff and systems in the service did not support this practice.

Staff training, supervision and quality checks were not carried out routinely in line with the provider’s policy which meant people may be cared for by staff without the appropriate knowledge, skills, and support. People’s needs in relation to eating and drinking were not assessed or monitored to ensure their safety and wellbeing. The service did not always work effectively with other agencies to promote positive outcomes for people. We have made a recommendation about this.

People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring, however we also received feedback that staff could be impatient and rushed due to time constraints. Staff knew how to treat people with dignity and respect, but people’s needs and rights in relation to decision making and communication were not always supported effectively. We have made a recommendation about this.

People’s care needs were not always reviewed or up to date in their care plans. There was insufficient guidance for staff on how to meet some people’s needs. Most people who could tell us about their care needs said they were met but records to support this were not always completed. Care planning for end-of-life care required improvement to ensure people’s needs and preferences were considered, recorded, and met.

Governance arrangements were not effective, and leadership was inconsistent. The provider had not operated their quality assurance systems effectively to ensure the service was safe and people received high-quality person-centred care.

Staff were recruited safely and staff new to care completed an induction. People told us their independence was supported and, those who were able to participate, enjoyed activities provided by the service.

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

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 12 August 2021, and this is the first inspection. The last rating for the service under the previous provider was good, published on 10 October 2018.

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about unsafe care including an allegation of neglect of a person, medicines errors, and staffing issues. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. The overall rating for this service is Inadequate based on the findings of this report.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified breaches in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding people from abuse, staffing, leadership and governance, need for consent and providing person-centred care.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.

If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe and there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions the registration.

For adult social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it, and it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions, it will no longer be in special measures.