Background to this inspection
Updated
3 November 2018
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 home, and to provide a rating for the home under the Care Act 2014.
The inspection was carried out on 9 October 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.
Before the inspection we reviewed relevant information that we had about the provider such as the findings of our last inspection. We also received a provider information return (PIR) from the home. A PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the home, what the home does well and improvements they plan to make.
During the inspection we spoke with three people who lived at the home. We also spoke with the manager and a care staff member.
We reviewed documents and records that related to people’s care and the management of the home. We reviewed three people’s care plans, which included risk assessments and four staff files which included pre-employment checks. We looked at other documents held at the home such as medicine, training, supervision and quality assurance records.
After the inspection, we spoke with one care staff member.
Updated
3 November 2018
We carried out an unannounced inspection of Khaya Project on 9 October 2018. Khaya Project 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. Khaya Project is registered to provide accommodation and support with personal care for a maximum of five people with a mental health condition. There were three people living in the home at the time of the inspection.
At our last comprehensive inspection on 22 August 2017, the home was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’ as robust risk assessments were not in place for one person to ensure they were safe at all times. During this inspection we found improvements had been made and the home has now been rated ‘Good’.
The home had a manager, who was the provider and registered with the Care Quality Commission as a provider. Like registered managers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and the associated regulations on how the home is run.
Risks had been identified and assessed, which provided information to staff on how to mitigate risks to keep people safe. Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and knew how to keep people safe.
Medicines were managed safely. We found that people’s Medicine Administration Records (MAR) had been completed accurately. Medicines was being administered as instructed on people’s MAR, or in accordance with the provider’s policy. Medicines were stored securely.
Systems were in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. There was a daily cleaning schedule and people were encouraged to clean their own rooms.
There were sufficient staffing levels to support people and staff had time to provide person centred care. Pre-employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to care for people. Premises safety checks had been carried out to ensure the premises was safe.
Staff had the knowledge, training and skills to care for people effectively. Staff felt supported to carry out their roles and received regular supervisions.
People had choices during meal times and were supported with cooking meals when required. People told us they enjoyed the food. People had access to healthcare services.
Staff were aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and sought people’s consent before supporting them.
People told us that staff were friendly and caring. Our observations confirmed this. People were treated in a respectful and dignified manner by staff who understood the need to protect people's human rights. People had been involved with making decisions about their care.
People received care that was shaped around their individual needs, interests and preferences. Care plans were person centred and staff knew how to provide personalised care to people.
People were aware of how to make complaints if they wanted to and staff knew how to manage complaints.
People had an activities schedule, which included accessing the community. Group activities were organised and people were encouraged to participate in these activities.
Staff felt well supported by the management team. People were complimentary about the management of the home. Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place to make continuous improvements.