Archived: Mokattam

Updated 11 July 2018

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.

Our inspection took place on 7 June 2018 and was announced.

Our inspection was completed by two adult social care inspectors and an Expert 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.

We reviewed information we already held about the service. This included notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We also requested information from relatives, local authorities, clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and other health or social care professionals. We checked records held by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and the local fire inspectorate.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We attempted to communicate with five people who used the service. Staff members assisted us to communicate with people. We also spoke with three relatives and one person’s friend.

We spoke with the provider’s nominated individual, deputy head of regulated services and deputy manager. We also spoke with five care workers. We received written feedback from commissioners the local authority safeguarding team and the fire inspectorate. The registered manager was on leave at the time our inspection.

We looked at two people’s care records, two staff personnel files, the medicines administration charts and other records about the management of the service. After the inspection, we asked the nominated individual to send us further documentation and we received and reviewed this information. This evidence was included as part of our inspection.

Updated 11 July 2018

Our inspection took place on 7 June 2018 and was announced.

Mokattam is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. We regulate both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the “Registering the Right Support” and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service can provide care and support for up to six adults with learning disabilities or autism. At the time of our inspection, the service accommodated six people. Each person had their own bedroom, and there were communal facilities such as dining, lounge and kitchen. The premises were adapted into a care home. The service is due to move to a new location in 2019. We made a recommendation regarding Mokattam’s move to a new house.

The provider is required to have a registered manager as part of their conditions of registration. 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. At the time of our inspection, there was a registered manager in post.

At our last inspection on 15 May 2017, there were three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We issued three requirement notices against the provider and required an action plan. At this inspection, there was evidence that satisfactory changes were made to ensure people’s health and safety was protected, and that the quality of care was monitored and effectively managed. The service has now achieved compliance with the relevant regulations.

We found people were protected against abuse or neglect. There were personalised risk assessments tailored to people’s individual needs. Sufficient staff were deployed to provide support to the person and ensure their safety. Medicines were safely managed. The premises were clean and tidy.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated codes of practice. People were assisted to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff received appropriate induction, training, supervision and support. This ensured their knowledge, skills and experience were suitable. People’s care preferences, likes and dislikes were assessed, recorded and respected. Access to other community healthcare professionals ensured the person could maintain a healthy lifestyle.

Staff had caring relationships with people who used the service and their relatives. There was complimentary feedback from people, relatives and other healthcare professionals about staff and the service. People’s privacy was respected and they received dignified support from staff.

The service provided very person-centred care to people. People and relatives were included in care planning and reviews. Care plans were detailed and contained information on how staff could provide appropriate support in conjunction with people. Some care plans required more up-to-date information and reviews. There was a satisfactory complaints system in place.

The service was well-led. This had improved since our last inspection. There was a positive workplace culture and staff felt that management listened to what they had to say. The provider had improved methods to measure the safety and quality of care. The service had strong relationships with community stakeholders and was an active member of several organisations.