Archived: Housing 21 - Olive House

Updated 24 April 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by a single inspector over a period of three days.

Service and service type:

Olive House is a supported living service for older people, some of whom have dementia, mental health issues or other physical or learning disabilities. There are 50 self-contained flats at the service. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. There were 36 people receiving personal care when we visited.

The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission working within the service at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

The inspection was unannounced. We visited the office location on 8, 15 and 18 February 2019 to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.

What we did:

Before the inspection; We reviewed the information we held about the service which included the previous inspection report and the Provider Information Return Form (PIR). The PIR 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.

During the inspection:

• We spoke with five people using the service and two of their relatives.

• We spoke with four care staff two assistant care managers, the newly appointed interim care manager of the service and two members of senior management within the organisation.

• We also spoke with a social worker during our inspection.

• We looked at a sample of five people’s care records, four staff records and records related to the management of the service.

After the inspection we spoke with another social care professional from the local authority to obtain their feedback.

Updated 24 April 2019

About the service:

Olive House is a supported living service for older people, some of whom have dementia, mental health issues or other physical or learning disabilities. This service provides care and support to people living in 50 flats within a ‘supported living’ setting and there were 36 people receiving personal care.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

People’s experience of using this service:

•People gave good feedback about care staff and told us they were kind and caring. However, relatives told us they thought understaffing was an issue that was affecting the delivery of care. We observed that the service was understaffed by three care staff on the second day of our inspection.

•People did not have any concerns about the competence of their care staff. However, records indicated that care staff did not have up to date training and were not being properly supported with supervisions.

•People did not have any concerns about the management of the service, however, relatives told us they felt the management of the service was poor. One relative told us communication about basic issues regarding the care of their family member was very poor. Another relative said they had noticed a decline in the service since the departure of the previous registered manager.

•People’s feedback was not actively sought and acted on. Where the provider received a formal complaint, we found these were responded to appropriately. However, the provider did not effectively seek people’s feedback on a regular basis and did not take action when advised of less formal concerns.

•People did not receive appropriate support with activities. The previous activities coordinator had left the service in January 2019 and since this time, there had been no effective provision for providing activities or ensuring that people were not at risk of social isolation.

•We found two breaches of regulations in relation to staffing and providing care staff with appropriate support. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the end of the full version of this report.

Rating at last inspection: Good. (report published 09 August 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The previous inspection was a comprehensive inspection.

Follow up:

We will ask the provider to tell us how they will make changes to ensure they improve the rating of the service to at least Good. We will continue to monitor information and intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection guidelines. We may inspect sooner if any concerning information is received.