Archived: Newcastle

Updated 17 August 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.

This inspection took place on 17 and 18 July 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice due to the service being a supported living service, assisting people in their own homes. We wanted to be sure there would be someone at the offices to meet us. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed 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. We reviewed information we held about the provider, in particular notifications about incidents, accidents, safeguarding matters and any deaths.

We visited three homes of people who used the service and spoke with or observed four people who were receiving care. People who used the service were not always able to speak with us directly but we perceived them to look happy and relaxed in staff company and well cared for. We also spoke with the registered manager and five care workers who were on duty on the day of the inspection. Following the inspection we contacted three community professionals for their comments on the service and spoke directly with one of them.

We reviewed a range of documents and records including; four care records for people who used the service, four medicine administration records, four records of staff employed by the service, accidents and incident records, minutes of meetings, communication documents and a range of other quality audits and management records.

Updated 17 August 2017

This inspection took place on 17 and 18 July 2017 and was announced. A previous inspection, undertaken in September 2015, found there were no breaches of legal requirements and rated the service as Good overall. At this inspection we found the service was continuing to meet all legal requirements.

Azure Newcastle provides personal care to people who have a learning disability; some individuals also have a physical disability. The service provides staff to support people in their own homes and can include 24 hour and overnight support. At the time of the inspection 11 people were receiving support from the service.

The service had a registered manager who had been formally registered with the Commission since April 2013. 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.

Safeguarding procedures were in place. There had been two recent safeguarding matters formally dealt with. Safety checks were undertaken on people’s homes on a regular basis, including discussion with people about fire safety. Risk assessments were in place related to the environment and the delivery of care.

Appropriate staffing levels were maintained to support people’s individual needs. Suitable recruitment procedures and checks were in place to ensure staff employed had the correct skills and experience. Medicines were not always managed and administered in line with NICE guidance. We have made a recommendation about this. People were supported to access adequate food and drink.

Staff said they were able to access the training they required and records confirmed mandatory training was up to date. Staff told us, and records confirmed there were regular supervision sessions and that they had an annual appraisal.

The registered manager had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. A number of people had restrictions in place linked to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Some people had restriction placed on them by the Court of Protection and copies of these orders were kept on file. Where people did not have capacity to make decisions then best interests decisions had been taken and documented. People had access to health care professionals to help maintain their wellbeing and staff responded to any health concerns.

We observed good relationships between people and staff and saw care provided was personal and responsive to people’s needs. Questionnaire responses from relatives of people indicated the service as good. Questionnaire responses from people who used the service were positive. Staff demonstrated a genuine interest in people as individuals and were empathetic in their approach. People were treated with dignity and respect.

People had individualised care plans that addressed their identified needs. Reviews of care needs were undertaken, although changes were sometimes only noted through hand written items added to the text. Individuals were supported to engage in a range of events and activities linked to their interests, both in their homes and in the community. Two formal complaints had been received and dealt with since the last inspection.

The registered manager showed us records confirming regular checks and audits were carried out at the service. Staff were positive about the leadership of the service and the registered manager. The provider was meeting legal requirements in relation to notifying the CQC of events and displaying their current quality rating. Records were complete and up to date.