Background to this inspection
Updated
9 November 2016
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.
The inspection took place on the 2 August 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was conducted by one adult social care 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 this information for consideration during the inspection. Prior to the inspection we contacted the local authority safeguarding and quality monitoring teams, who did not raise any concerns. We also looked at the most recent Healthwatch report who visited the service in November 2015, which did not highlight any concerns. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion with powers to enter and inspect adult social care services.
During the inspection we spoke with four people using the service and their relatives. We also spoke with five members of staff, aswell as the registered manager. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We looked at the care records for four people using the service, and the recruitment records for three members of staff. We also looked at other documentation relating to the day-to-day management of the service.
Updated
9 November 2016
The inspection took place on the 2 August 2016 and was unannounced.
The service is located in the town of Weaverham and is registered to provide accommodation for up to 30 people who require personal care. The service is run by a not-for-profit organisation who also own a number of other services throughout the north-west of England.
There was a registered manager in post who had been registered with the CQC since 2010. 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.
Staff had received the training they required to carry out their role effectively, however they were not always aware of their roles and responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We have made a recommendation around staff training in this.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. The registered manager had referred to the local authority for support with finding alternative placements for people whose dependency needs had become too high for them to manage. This was because this was impacting upon the time staff had to spend with people using the service. Following the inspection we were informed that alternative placements had been found, which had impacted positively upon pressures on staff.
There were risk assessments in place which provided staff with relevant and up-to-date information around how to keep people safe. Action had been taken to refer people on to relevant health or social care professionals where required, and assistive technology was in place to support with keeping people safe. Environmental checks were completed on a regular basis to ensure the environment was safe.
People were supported to take their medication as prescribed. Medication administration records (MARs) were filled out by staff to demonstrate when medicines had been given. These were stored securely in people rooms.
Care records contained personalised information around people’s likes, dislikes and their preferred daily routine. Information contained within care records was reviewed on a regular basis which ensured that staff had access to relevant and up-to-date information. This helped ensured that people were provided with care and support that was suitable to meet their needs.
People were protected from the risk of malnutrition and dehydration. People were provided with food and drink options that were suitable for them, for example soft foods, or syrup thick fluids. A choice of options was available at meal times, and where people did not like these options they could request something different. Staff provided people with support to eat and drink where required.
People told us that staff were respectful and kind towards them. Staff maintained people’s dignity by ensuring that doors were closed during personal care interventions, and told us that they were mindful of making people feel at ease whilst supporting them. This ensured that people’s dignity and respect were maintained.
No complaints had been received by the service over the past 12 months however people were aware of the complaints process, and told us that they felt confident that the registered manager would respond to any concerns. The registered provider sought feedback from people on an annual basis. The results from the 2015 survey showed that people felt positive about the service being provided.
People and staff spoke positively about the registered manager and described her as “approachable”. The registered manager completed audits of the service being provided, which included care records and night times checks. Information around accidents and incidents was submitted to the registered provider on a monthly basis so that they could ensure appropriate actions had been taken to keep people safe.