Background to this inspection
Updated
7 April 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.
The inspection took place on 12 and 15 February 2016 and was unannounced.
The inspection team consisted of two inspectors.
Before the inspection took place, we looked at the information the Care Quality Commission (CQC) holds about the service. We spoke with one person that used the service and gained feedback through surveys the provider had requested from two relatives of people that used the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.
We spent time observing care and speaking with the deputy manager, service improvement manager, senior on duty and two staff members. We also spoke with two health care professionals who visited the service regularly. We asked for feedback from the City of Bradford Adult Protection Unit. We looked at three people’s care plan documentation, three staff files as well as documentation relating to the management of the service such as training records, policies and procedures and information we had received about the service and statutory notifications we had received from the home.
Before the inspection, the provider completed 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.
Updated
7 April 2016
On the 12 and 15 February 2016 we inspected 3 & 4 Cuthberts Close. This was an unannounced inspection.
The service was last inspected in May 2014 and was fully compliant with the outcome areas that were inspected against.
3 & 4 Cuthbert Close provides accommodation and personal care to a maximum of eight people who are living with learning disabilities. All the accommodation is in single rooms and the service is located in the residential area of Queensbury, close to Bradford city centre.
There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.
People were protected from harm by staff who knew how to keep people safe and what action to take if they suspected abuse was happening.
Potential risks to people had been identified and assessed appropriately. When accidents or incidents occurred, risk assessments were updated as needed.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to support people and safe recruitment practices were followed.
Medicines were administered in a safe way. Storage and recording of medicines was audited regularly.
Staff had received all mandatory training and there were opportunities for them to receive service specific training. All staff training was up-to-date.
Regular supervision meetings were organised and the deputy manager had planned supervisions with staff as well as annual appraisals. Team meetings were held and staff had regular communication with each other at handover meetings which took place between each shift.
Consent to care and treatment was sought in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
The registered manager and deputy manager were seeking authorisation for people under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards legislation.
People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink and to maintain a healthy diet.
People had access to healthcare professionals. People’s rooms were decorated in line with their personal preferences.
Staff knew people well and positive, caring relationships had been developed. People were encouraged to express their views and these were communicated to staff in a variety of ways.
People were involved in decisions about their care as much as they were able. People’s privacy and dignity was respected and promoted. Staff understood how to care for people in a sensitive way.
Care plans provided comprehensive information about people in a person-centred way. People’s personal histories had been recorded and their preferences, likes and dislikes were documented.
Relatives acknowledged and we observed there was a variety of activities and outings on offer which people could choose to do.
Complaints were dealt with in line with the provider’s policy, but there had been no formal complaints logged in the previous year.
People could express their views and discuss any issues or concerns with their keyworker, who co-ordinated all aspects of their care. The provider organised surveys for relatives to feedback their views about the service.
The culture of the service was homely and family-orientated. Regular audits measured the quality of the care and service provided.