Archived: Honister Gardens Care Home

Updated 28 July 2016

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 6 and 9 May 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors.

As part of our planning we looked at the information we held about the service including information from any notifications the provider had sent us and audits. A notification is information about important events that the provider is required to send us by law. We also asked the local authority monitoring team for their views of the service.

During the inspection we looked at support plans and risk assessments of three people, six staff files, people's medicines charts and other paperwork that the service held. We also requested information from local authority monitoring teams and people’s families.

Updated 28 July 2016

This inspection took place on 6 and 9 May 2016 and was unannounced. At the last inspection on 8 & 9 October 2015 we had found that while some improvements had been made from the inspection of July 2015, there were still breaches of regulations.

Honister Gardens Care Home provides care, support and accommodation for up to five people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were three people living in the home.

We took enforcement action following the inspection on 8 & 9 October 2015 and imposed conditions on the provider's registration. These conditions restricted the service from admitting new people without the permission of the Care Quality Commission, and required the provider to submit regular information to us as to how they were addressing our concerns. This was in addition to the conditions that were already in place on the provider, which related to the management of people’s finances. The service also continued under special measures.

We carried out this inspection to check what progress had been made to address the breaches we had identified at the July and October 2015 inspections and also carried out a comprehensive ratings inspection.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

We found improvements had been made in each key question, although we identified some areas that required improvement. We identified the risk assessment of one person was not comprehensive. It did not include a step by step detail of action to be taken to minimise risk to others. Complaints were not always logged or responded to. We also saw that one person did not have a social care plan and there was no evidence of outdoor activities available to meet this individual’s interests and reduce isolation.

People’s relatives felt the service was safe and that staff treated people well. The conditions we had imposed, in relation to management of people’s finances and management of risks to people had been complied with.

Safeguarding adult's procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. People's medicines were managed appropriately and they received them as prescribed by health care professionals. Risks to people were identified and monitored.

There were appropriate records of people’s finances including their spending. Staff carried out daily and weekly checks of people’s finances to reduce the risk of financial abuse. Risks to people were identified and monitored.

There were sufficient staff to meet the needs of people and the service had conducted appropriate recruitment checks before staff started work. Arrangements were in place to deal with staffing emergencies.

People had been involved in the planning of their care. We also saw that their relatives were involved as appropriate. Support plans and risk assessments provided clear information and guidance for staff on how to support people. This included guidance about meeting people’s nutritional needs.

Staff received adequate training and support to carry out their roles. They asked people for their consent before they provided care and demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Staff told us there had been improvements at the home following our inspection of October 2015. Audits had been carried out to identify any improvements that were needed. Staff felt confident they were heading in the right direction. The registered manager felt the service had recruited the right staff and management team to move the service forward. However, the audits had not been effective enough to identify the shortfalls we saw. For example, we identified areas for improvements in people’s records and that complaints were not always logged or responded to in a timely manner. This had not been picked up through the provider’s audits.

In view of the improvements made in each key question the home is no longer in special measures. The conditions imposed on its registration at the October 2015 inspection have also been lifted.