This unannounced inspection took place on 14 and 16 September 2015.
Sunnyside is a seven bed service providing support and accommodation to people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection five people were living there. It is a large house in a residential area close to public transport and other services. The house has special adaptations to the bath and shower rooms. There is a lift and the service is accessible for people with physical disabilities or mobility problems. People live in a clean environment that is suitable for their needs.
There was a registered manager in post. However, the registered manager had not been at the service since early June 2015. An experienced manager from another of the provider’s services was managing the service in the interim. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
In August 2015 there was a serious incident at Sunnyside and a person sustained life threatening injuries. The circumstances of the incident are under investigation so we cannot refer further to it in this report.
There had been concerns about the quality of the service and the provider was taking action to address these. People told us that their concerns had been listened to. They added that they had seen improvements since the interim manager had been at the service. They had confidence in him and felt that there would be further improvements under his leadership.
Not all aspects of the service provided were safe. In August 2015 the fire service carried out a fire safety visit and issued the provider with an enforcement notice due to the seriousness of their concerns. The provider was addressing the issues identified. For example, smoke detectors had been replaced and staff had received additional fire safety training.
Systems were not in place to adequately minimise risk and to ensure that people were supported as safely as possible.
Staff were attentive and supportive. They engaged with people and chatted with them throughout the day. People were supported by kind, caring staff who treated them with respect.
People received their prescribed medicines safely.
People’s care plans contained a lot of information about their needs and preferences. These were being reviewed and updated to ensure that staff had current and sufficient details to enable them to provide a responsive service that fully met people’s needs.
Systems were in place to support staff to gain the necessary skills and knowledge to meet peoples assessed needs, preferences and choices but staff training was not always up to date.
People were supported to make choices about what they did and what happened to them. They took part in activities of their choice in the community and in the service but these were limited and repetitive and needed to be developed further.
People’s healthcare needs were monitored and addressed to ensure that they remained as healthy as possible.
Staff had received Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) training. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards is where a person can be deprived of their liberties where it is deemed to be in their best interests or for their own safety. Staff were aware that on occasions this was necessary. We saw that this was thought to be necessary for some people living at the service to keep them safe.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs. They told us that they liked the food.
Although people spoke positively about the improvements that had been made by the interim manager social care professionals were concerned that there was not a full time manager in post to oversee the service.
The provider’s recruitment process ensured that staff were suitable to work with people who need support.
People were happy to talk to the interim manager and to raise any concerns they had. They had confidence that he would deal with any issues.
The provider and the management team monitored the quality of service provided to ensure that people received a safe and effective service that met their needs. When shortfalls had been identified action had been taken to address these.
The environment was suitable for the people who used the service but needed redecoration to make it more homely and welcoming.
At the time of the visit staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs.
We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.