Background to this inspection
Updated
29 March 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 checked 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 unannounced inspection took place on 8 March 2017 and was carried out by one inspector.
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. We reviewed the completed PIR and previous inspection reports before the inspection.
We also reviewed information we had about the provider, including notifications of any safeguarding or other incidents affecting the safety and well-being of people using the service.
We spoke with two relatives of people using the service. We also observed interactions between staff and people using the service as we wanted to see if the way that staff communicated and supported people had a positive effect on their well-being.
We spoke with four care staff including the registered manager. We also received feedback from social care professionals and commissioners.
We looked at three people’s care records and other documents relating to their care as well as policies and procedures in place at the service.
Updated
29 March 2017
This inspection took place on 8 March 2017 and was unannounced. At our last inspection in January 2015 the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.
Prince of Wales Respite (Breakaway Hotel) provides respite care for adults with learning disabilities. People stay for varying periods. Some people may also have sensory or physical impairments. The home also offers one emergency placement. The service is provided by the London Borough of Camden. There were three people using the service at the time of the inspection.
There was a 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.
Relative told us they thought the service was safe and people using the service had their needs met.
There were safe systems in place with regards to recognising and reporting potential abuse and harm. Staff knew the types of abuse that may occur as well as how to recognise the signs.
Medicines were administered safely in line with medicines policy at the home. Records were accurate in relation to administration and they were stored appropriately.
Staff had received training in and understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. People were encouraged to make their own day to day decisions about what they liked to wear, the food they liked to eat and the activities they took part in.
People received a balanced diet and food and drink choices were varied. People were encouraged to be involved in decisions around what wanted to eat and drink.
People were appropriately supported to access health and other services during their visits to the service.
Staff awareness of equality and diversity aspects of people care were integral to how support was delivered at the home and was included in people’s individual care plan.
Dignity and privacy was maintained and staff ensured this was respected whilst providing personal care.
People were receiving care, treatment and support that met their needs. Care records contained detailed pre-admission information that was updated before each stay.
Complaints policies and procedures were in place and any action taken as a result of complaints were used for learning and shared with staff.
As part of quality monitoring, people would have an opportunity to complete a feedback form after each stay. The form was translated into an accessible format for people to understand.
Maintenance checks regarding the safety of equipment and the premises were taking place on a regular basis and records of were completed after each visit.