Archived: United Response - 73 Elmers Green

Updated 30 December 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.

The inspection took place on 30 November 2017 and was unannounced. Our inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors. Following the last inspection we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions safe and well-led to at least good. During this inspection we found improvements had been made to the safe management of medicines, risk management and audits and quality monitoring of the service. The actions had been completed and therefore the service was meeting the requirements of the current regulation.

United response 73 Elmers Green is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The care home provides support for up to four people in a single level building. All bedrooms were of single occupancy, one of these had ensuite facilities. Access to public areas included a lounge, kitchen and a sensory room.

During our inspection we undertook a number of different methods to identify the experiences of people who used the service. As people were unable to verbally communicate with us we undertook some observations and spoke with three family members. We also spoke with two staff members and the home manager.

As part of our inspection we looked at a number of different records relating to the management of the service. This included two care files, medication records, two staff files, audits and quality monitoring, team meeting minutes and duty rotas. We also checked the action plan the provider had sent to us following our last inspection. This was to check what measures they had taken to ensure the breaches of regulation were met.

Prior to our inspection we checked the information we held about the service. This included any feedback, compliments or notifications the service is required to send to us by law. As part of the inspection process we asked the service to send us a Provider Information Return (PIR). Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. This 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. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

Updated 30 December 2017

This inspection took place on 30 November 2017 and was unannounced. United response 73 Elmers Green is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to four people living with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection three people were receiving care from the service.

The registered manager had left their position and was no longer working for the service. There was a new home manager who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. 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.

At our last inspection on 31 October 2016, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements in relation to the safe management of medicines, risk management, audits and quality monitoring, this action has been completed.

Relatives we spoke with told us their family members were safe in the home. Records relating to safeguarding investigations were in place and demonstrated the actions taken as a response to any allegations.

Medicines were stored, administered and handled safely. Staff had completed medicines training and competency checks that demonstrated they had the knowledge and skills to administer medicines safely.

Risks had been assessed and measures were in place to ensure people were cared for safely.

Appropriate staffing levels were in place that ensured people received suitable and timely care. Staff told us and records confirmed relevant training had been completed. Safe recruitment procedures had been followed to ensure only staff suitable for their role were employed to work with this vulnerable client group.

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. Capacity assessments had been completed and relevant deprivation of liberty applications had been submitted to the assessing authority.

Choices of meals were seen. People were supported to be involved in decisions relating to the meals on offer.

Relatives told us they were happy with the care people received. We saw staff interacting well with people and it was clear people were treated with dignity and respect. Measures to ensure people were supported with their individual communication needs was recorded in their care files.

Care files were detailed and comprehensive and provided information about how to support people’s individual needs. Systems were in place to support people’s end of life needs, if it was required.

There was a variety of activities available for people to take part in. We observed activities taking place during our inspection.

Systems to deal with complaints were in place. Policies and procedures were available to guide staff about how to deal with complaints.

We received positive feedback about the improvements that had been made since the new home manager started at the service. Team meetings were regular and minutes confirmed the topics discussed as part of the meetings.

Regular audits and quality monitoring were taking place. This ensured the home was safe for people to live in.