Archived: Sanctuary Supported Living - 33 Montserrat Road

The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

We found that people had documented plans of care which indicated how they wished their care and treatment to be provided. People living in the home had 24 hour access to staff at another home managed by the provider. Whilst people were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible we found that the necessary safeguards had been put in place. These included what people should do in the event of an emergency and how to deal with strangers who came to the door.

We spoke with three people living in the home, one relative and two members of staff. One person told us, "We have to check everything before we go to bed" and another person told us, "Staff come straight away when I call them".

Is the service effective?

We observed people being treated with dignity and respect, whilst encouraging their independence and respecting their wishes. People were supported to complete household chores such as washing and vacuuming. People's hobbies and interests were taken into account when planning their care and they were known in the local community.

One person told us, "Look at my bird house, I've got blue tits nesting in there". A relative told us, "They (the staff) encourage (their relative) to do things. They go on holidays".

Is the service caring?

We saw staff treating people with compassion and kindness. Staff knew people well and we saw that people's wishes were respected and documented. Members of staff we spoke with told us they looked in the care plans if there was anything they were unsure of. People had regular meetings with their keyworkers to ensure that their care and support was meeting their needs.

We spoke with one relative who said the service was, "Exceptionally good". They added that their relative "Seems to be very happy". One person told us, "The staff are very nice" and another said, "I like it here. The staff are my friends".

Is the service responsive?

There was evidence to suggest that health problems and other issues regarding people's care were dealt with promptly and efficiently. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed and updated on a regular basis. People had regular individual meetings with their keyworkers and group "resident" meetings took place regularly.

One person told us, "If there's a problem they (the staff) sort it out quickly". A member of staff told us, "We meet monthly to discuss concerns".

Is the service well-led?

We found that there was a low turnover of staff in the home. Staff were supported to provide high quality care to people by means of regular training, team meetings, individual staff supervisions and annual appraisals. Regular audits took place to help ensure the smooth running of the home and we noted that there was evidence of learning from incidents.

The two members of staff we spoke with told us the manager was very approachable. A relative told us, "I'm entirely happy, particularly with the manager". One person told us, "I would ring (the manager) if I had a problem".

We saw that care plans were detailed and in the main were up to date. People were able to consent to the care they received and were involved and consulted in decision making.

The home was safe and suitable for the people who lived there and improvements had been made since the last inspection.

There was a suitable recruitment procedure in place which protected people who lived in the home.

There were processes in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided.

People told us they received the care and support they needed from the service. Both people we spoke to said they were consulted about their care, had seen their care plan, and, had signed to agree to its contents.

Care plans detailed the support people needed and showed people attended a range of activities through the week such as going to a day centre, work and social events.

People said they were able to make choices in how they spent their time. One person said, 'I can do what I want.' Both people said they were involved in choosing the meals for the home's menu plan.

The home was staffed for parts of the day and people said this suited them. Assessments were carried out and recorded so that the home knew people could be independent in the home. People told us they felt safe at the home and knew what the arrangements were so they could contact staff at any time of the day.

We saw the home had a staff rota detailing the hours worked by staff. People told us they were enough staff to assist and support them.

We saw the home was generally well maintained but that tiling in the ground floor shower was damaged leaving edges of cut tiling exposed. This posed a risk of injury to people.

People told us were able to raise any issues about the home or themselves either directly with staff or at the residents' monthly meetings. People said staff always responded to any matters they raised if they were not happy.