Archived: Creative Support - Robert Heath Street

Updated 13 January 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.

This inspection took place on 26 November 2015 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors. We looked at information we held about the service. This included looking at information received by the public and other professionals. Before the inspection, we asked the provider 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. We used the information in the PIR completed by the provider to help plan our inspection.

We spoke with four people who used the service. Some of the people using the service were not able to give us their views in detail so we spent time observing how staff offered care and interacted with people. We spoke with four members of staff, the acting manager and the service director.

We looked at four people’s care records to see if they were accurate and up to date.

We also looked at records relating to the management of the service. These included quality checks, two staff recruitment files, complaints records and other documents to help us to see how care was being delivered, monitored and maintained.

Updated 13 January 2016

The inspection took place on 26 November 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in May 2014 we found that the home was meeting the regulations that we checked.

Creative Support - Robert Heath Street is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 10 people who have mental health needs. The service is split into five bungalows and five flats with a shared lounge, kitchen and dining room. At the time of our inspection there were 10 people using the service.

There was a registered manager but they were no longer working at the service at the time of our inspection. 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.

People felt safe and systems were in place to ensure that people were protected from avoidable harm and abuse. Staff understood different types of abuse and how to recognise signs of abuse. They were aware of the safeguarding adult’s procedures and how to report concerns so that people were protected.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to deliver safe care and support people who used the service. We saw that people were supported to attend appointments and access the community. People’s risks were assessed and plans were in place to minimise risks. Medicines were managed to ensure that people received them safely.

Staff had the knowledge and skills to ensure they could support people effectively. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being followed to make sure that people’s rights were respected.

People’s health needs were met and they were supported to have regular contact with health professionals when needed. People had enough to eat and drink and were offered choice and flexibility about their food and drinks.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff who knew their preferences and goals. People were encouraged to be involved in making decisions about their care and support and staff communicated effectively with each individual.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected and they were encouraged to be as independent as possible and participate in the local community.

People received personalised care and were enabled to follow their hobbies and interests. Staff were proactive in supporting people to be involved in work and learning opportunities if they chose to be.

People knew how to complain and there was an accessible complaints procedure available that people knew about. People were encouraged to give their views at regular residents meetings .

Quality monitoring systems were not always effective in driving continuous improvement. Staff felt they were receiving more support following changes in the management arrangements at the home and were aware of procedures in place to raise concerns.