Archived: Thomas Place

Thomas Place provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

Not everyone using Thomas Place receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection, there were 25 people receiving the regulated activity.

This was the first inspection of the service since their registration with the CQC on 14 November 2017, following a change in provider. The service’s office was based at the site of the extra care unit.

There was no registered manager working at the service. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. We were supported during the inspection by the care delivery director and the field care supervisor. The provider had employed a manager who had started working at the service in June 2018. At the time of our inspection, they had not started the process of applying to be the registered manager with the Care Quality Commission. The provider was in breach of their registration by not having a registered manager in post.

People told us they felt safe living at Thomas Place. People were protected from the risk of abuse, staff had received training and were knowledgeable about what do to in the event of a safeguarding concern being raised. The manager had notified the local authority of safeguarding concerns but they had failed to submit notification to CQC.

On the day of the inspection, we observed and people we spoke with told us there were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to support them. However, following the inspection, we received mixed feedback from people and key professionals involved with the service. People told us staff were often rushing and they did not always know who was coming to provide them with support. Key professionals told us people often reported late calls.

We have made a recommendation about this in the report.

Staff knew and understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff had received training relevant to their roles and received regular updates. Staff were supported through planned one to one supervisions to discuss their training and development. Staff meetings gave staff the opportunity to voice their opinions. The provider’s policies and systems promoted safe recruitment practices.

Where required, people were supported to manage and take their medicines as prescribed. Staff received training in medicines administration and had access to the provider’s policy for further guidance. Competency checks were routinely carried out by senior staff.

People's needs were assessed before they started using the service and support plans were person centred.

Risks to people were assessed, monitored and were reviewed regularly or when people's needs changed. People were involved in decisions about any risks they may take.

People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion. Staff respected people’s privacy when supporting them.

People were supported to maintain good health and were referred to healthcare professionals when this was required.

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and staff were aware of people's nutritional needs. The service worked with external professionals, such as district nurses, GPs, occupational therapists and speech and language therapists as and when needed.

People were supported 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.

People who used the service and their relatives were aware of how to make a complaint. Complaints were recorded, investigated and responded to in line with the provider’s policy.

People, relatives and staff were consulted about the quality of the service. People told us management and staff were helpful and approachable.

People were protected by the prevention and control of infection; staff had access to personal protective equipment and completed food hygiene training.

There were quality assurance systems in place, which were used to promote continuous improvement. Accidents and incidents were reported and analysed to identify any patterns or trends to help reduce the likelihood of the incident or accident happening again.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 and one breach of section 33 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.