UBU - Cragmere

Updated 9 November 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 checked 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 visit took place on 29 September 2017 and was announced because it was a small service and people were often out during the day. We needed to make sure someone would be in.

The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector.

Before our inspection on 29 September 2017 we reviewed the information we held on the service. This included notifications we had received from the provider, about incidents that affect the health, safety and welfare of people the service supported. We checked to see if any information concerning the care and welfare of people who were supported had been received.

We reviewed the Provider Information Record (PIR) we received prior to our inspection. 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. This provided us with information and numerical data about the operation of the service. We used this information as part of the evidence for the inspection. This guided us to what areas we would focus on as part of our inspection.

We met all four people who lived at UBU Cragmere when we inspected. Two people were out for much of the time but we were able to have brief conversations with everyone. We observed staff interactions with one person who lived at the home. We spoke with the manager, the deputy manager and two care staff. Prior to our inspection visit we contacted the commissioning department at the local authority. They had no concerns about the service. This helped us to gain a balanced overview of what people experienced accessing the service.

We looked at care and support and medicine records of two people, the arrangements for meals, social and leisure activities information and records relating to the management of the home. We reviewed the services recruitment procedures and checked staffing levels and staff training. We also looked around the building to ensure it was clean, hygienic and a safe place for people to live.

Updated 9 November 2017

This inspection visit took place on 29 September 2017 and was announced.

UBU Cragmere is a detached dormer bungalow in the village of Glusburn. It provides support for up to four people with learning disabilities. Each person has their own bedroom and shares communal facilities of a kitchen/dining area, two bathrooms and two lounges. There is a garden to the front and rear of the property. When we inspected four people lived at UBU Cragmere.

At the last comprehensive inspection on 24 August 2015 the service was rated overall as good with requires improvement in the responsive domain. At this inspection we found the service remained overall good with well led as requires improvement as there had been no registered manage for over a year.

At the last inspection we recommended an increase in social and leisure activities and improvements to the maintenance of the garden area. On this inspection we saw people were involved in regular work, social and leisure activities. Also the garden was tidy and maintained.

There was not a manager registered with CQC. The previous registered manager had left the service in June 2016. The service had attempted to recruit and register a new manager since this time. They had recruited three managers who had left before completing the registration process. This had left staff without stable leadership over this period.

We spoke with people who lived at Cragmere and observed staff interactions with people. People told us they were happy at UBU Cragmere and liked the staff team. We saw interactions were frequent and caring.

There were procedures in place to protect people from abuse and unsafe care. We saw risk assessments were in place which provided guidance for staff. This minimised risks to people.

There were enough staff to support people with personal care and social and leisure activities. There had been a period of high staff turnover but this had settled when we inspected. Staff said they were supported to develop their skills and knowledge to assist them to carry out their role and to provide safe care and support in the way people wanted.

Medicines were managed safely. Medicines were stored securely, administered as prescribed and disposed of appropriately.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People indicated they were happy with the variety and choice of meals available to them.

Care plans were personalised and informative. They described how people wished to be supported and their needs and wishes. People who received support or where appropriate their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care. Their consent and agreement were sought before providing care.

People who lived at UBU Cragmere knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available and people said they could let staff know if they were not happy about something.

Senior staff monitored the support staff provided to people. Audits of care and surveys of the views of people and their families were carried out regularly.