Our inspection took place on 8 September 2015 and was carried out by one inspector. The provider is registered to accommodate and deliver personal care to ten people who lived with a learning disability or associated need. Ten people lived at the home at the time of our inspection. We started our inspection early in the morning so that we could meet and speak with the people who lived there and staff in case they were out of the home later.
At our last inspection on 5 July 2013 the provider was meeting all of the regulations that we assessed.
The manager was registered with us as is required by law. 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.
We found that medicine management systems needed some improvement so that people would consistently receive their medicine safely and as it had been prescribed by their doctor.
There were systems in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. Staff confirmed the reporting processes they should follow if they had any concerns about abuse.
Staffing levels at the time of our inspection meant that people may not always receive the care and support they needed.
Mental capacity assessments were not used and staff understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS) varied due to a lack of training.
Processes were in place to induct new staff to ensure that they had some knowledge when they first started work. Staff received supervision sessions and had the opportunity to attend staff meetings which provided support and development.
Staff felt adequately supported on a day to day basis in their job roles and received most of the training they needed to do their job safely.
People felt that the staff were nice and kind. Relatives felt that staff showed an interest in people and showed them respect.
People received input from a range of health care professionals. However, care planning was lacking in some instances as it did not always highlight people’s health care needs.
People were offered meals that they liked and felt that the meals met their needs.
A complaints procedure was available for people to use and people told us that they would be happy to use it if they had the need.
There was little quality monitoring of the service. The provider had not always ensured that they informed us of incidents that they should have to comply with the law and there was a lack of evidence to determine that regular audits and checks had been undertaken.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the report.