Archived: Lancashire Branch Office

Updated 18 May 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 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 28, 29, 30 March and 3 April 2017. We gave the service short notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available throughout the inspection. The inspection was carried out by five adult social care inspectors, one specialist pharmacist advisor and two experts by experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Prior to our inspection, we checked the information we held about the service. This included information about how the service was run, any information received about concerns relating to the care and welfare of people who used the service and statutory notifications we received from the provider. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

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.

During our inspection we undertook a number of different methods to assess the experiences of people who used the service. We spent some time in the office looking at documentation relating to the operation and management of the service. These included staff recruitment and training, audits and quality monitoring, feedback about the service and policies and procedures. We checked records in people’s homes these included, duty rotas, safety files and 21 care records for people who used the service.

With permission from people who used the service we visited 14 people’s homes. This was to understand the experiences of the care and support they received. We spoke with 32 people who used the service and eight family members. We received feedback from four professionals. We spoke with the registered manager who was in day to day charge of the service, seven members of staff from different departments, the regional director of the service eight team leaders and 27 support staff.

Updated 18 May 2017

This inspection took place on 28, 29, 30 March and 3 April 2017. We gave the service short notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available throughout the inspection.

Lancashire Branch Office is registered to provide supported living for older people and younger adults living with a learning disability, dementia, mental health, physical disability and sensory impairments across Lancashire. The main office is based in Burnley which provided facilities for staff training, meetings and engagement with people who used the service. At the time of our inspection the service supported people in 119 addresses and 285 people were receiving care from the service.

The service had registered manager in post. 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.

This inspection was the first inspection since the service was registered with the Commission on 10 June 2016. During this inspection we found the service was meeting the requirements of the current legislation. However we made a recommendation in relation to peoples care records.

All staff we spoke with aware of the signs of abuse and the actions to take if they suspected abuse. Staff received training to ensure they had the knowledge of protecting people for the risks of abuse.

There was a detailed and comprehensive medicines policy in place. The registered manager confirmed actions they were taking to ensure polices included up to date information on the management of “as required” medicines and medicated creams.

Recruitment and selection procedures were robust and records confirmed applications, references and proof of identity checks had been completed. Staff had received the relevant training to enable them to meet people’s needs safely.

Staff spoken with had an understanding of the principles of the MCA 2005. The registered manager told us referrals to the local authority was made for Deprivation of Liberty Assessments. This protected people who used the service from the risk of unsafe restrictions.

Staff we spoke with understood people’s individual needs, choice, likes and wishes and how to deliver good care. People who used the service and relatives were positive about the care they received and told us people’s individual care needs was discussed with them.

People were treated with dignity and respect. When people received support with their care needs this was done in the privacy of their bedrooms or bathroom.

People who used the service and relatives told us they had been involved in the development and reviews of their care files. Care records reflected people's, needs, choices, likes and preferences and how to support them. However we saw care files lacked consistency in their content in a number of the services we visited. The registered manager gave us assurances this issue would be addressed.

People who used the service we spoke with told us they undertook a variety of activities of their choice.

People knew how to raise a complaint. Records we looked at confirmed an effective system in place for dealing with complaints. We received positive feedback about the service.

The feedback from people who used the service, relatives and staff was positive about the management and leadership of the service. People were complimentary about the registered manager as well as senior staff responsible in the services we visited.

Effective systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. There was evidence of completed audits which included notes of findings and actions taken.

There was evidence that team meetings took place regularly. The registered manager told us they had introduced a meeting with senior management and staff to share information, good practice and ideas on how to improve the service.

Regular meetings were held to obtain feedback from staff, management and people who used the service.