Background to this inspection
Updated
19 March 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 29 January and 5 February 2016 and was unannounced.
The inspection was carried out by a single inspector.
Before the inspection the provider had completed a Provider Information Record (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider for key information about the service, what the service does well, and what improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed our records about the service, including previous inspection reports, statutory notifications and enquiries.
During our visit we met seven people who lived at the home. Because the majority of people living at the home had communication impairments, we were unable to fully assess their views of the support that they received. However, we were able to obtain limited feedback from three people. We were able to spend time observing care and support being delivered in the communal areas, including interactions between staff members and people who used the service. We also spoke with a family member of a person who lived at the home. In addition we spoke with the registered manager, the assistant manager and four members of the care team. We looked at records, which included the care records for four people who lived at the home, four staff recruitment records, policies and procedures, medicines records, and other records relating to the management of the home.
Updated
19 March 2016
This inspection took place on 29 January 2016 and was unannounced. We returned to the home on 5 February to complete our inspection. 48-499 Chichester Court was registered with CQC on 31 January 2014, and this was our first inspection of the home.
48-49 Chichester Court is a care home registered for ten people with a learning disability situated in Stanmore. At the time of our inspection there were no vacancies at the home. The people who used the service had significant support needs because of their learning disabilities such as physical and communication impairments and behaviours considered to be challenging.
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.
A family member told us that they felt that people who lived at the home were safe. We saw that people were comfortable and familiar with the staff supporting them.
People who lived at the home were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff members had received training in safeguarding, and were able to demonstrate their understanding of what this meant for the people they were supporting. They were also knowledgeable about their role in ensuring that people were safe and that concerns were reported appropriately.
People’s medicines were managed and given to them appropriately and records of medicines were well maintained.
Staff members at the home supported people in a caring and respectful way, and responded promptly to meet their needs and requests. There were enough staff members on duty to meet the needs of the people living at the home.
Staff members received regular relevant training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities and the needs of the people whom they supported. Appropriate checks took place as part of the recruitment process to ensure that new staff members were suitable for the work that they would be undertaking. All staff members received regular supervision from a manager, and those whom we spoke with told us that they felt well supported.
The home was meeting the requirements of The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Information about capacity was included in people’s care plans. Applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations had been made to the relevant local authority to ensure that people who were unable to make decisions were not inappropriately restricted. Staff members had received training in MCA and DoLS, and those we spoke with were able to describe their roles and responsibilities in relation to supporting people who lacked capacity to make decisions.
People’s nutritional needs were well met. Meals provided were varied and met guidance provided in people’s care plans. Alternatives were offered where required, and drinks and snacks were offered to people throughout the day.
Care plans and risk assessments were person centred and provided detailed guidance for staff around meeting people’s needs.
A range of activities for people to participate in throughout the week were provided. Staff members supported people to participate in these activities. People’s cultural and religious needs were supported by the service and detailed information about these was contained in people’s care plans.
The service had a complaints procedure. A family member told us that they knew how to make a complaint. No complaints had been received in the year previous to our inspection.
The care documentation that we saw showed that people’s health needs were regularly reviewed. Staff members liaised with health professionals to ensure that people received the support that they required..
Systems were in place to review and monitor the quality of the service, and action plans had been put in place and addressed where there were concerns. Policies and procedures were up to date and reflected good practice guidance.