Archived: Prospect Mount Road

Updated 31 March 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.

Although this inspection was scheduled it was carried out in part because we had received a notification of a safeguarding incident. This incident is subject to a criminal investigation and as a result this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident. However, the information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of risk for one person’s safety. This inspection examined those risks.

This inspection took place on 14 and 15 February 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by an adult social care inspector, a specialist advisor who had experience as a registered nurse and as a manager of services, particularly in the care of people living with dementia, and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. They had experience of mental and physical health issues and physical disability.

Before the inspection, the registered 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. We also looked at all notifications and contacts we had received from or about the service. This information helped us to plan the inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with fourteen people who used the service. We used the short observational framework for inspection tool (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We observed practice throughout the inspection.

The registered manager and deputy manager made themselves available throughout the day to answer any questions we had and supply any documents we requested. We interviewed the deputy manager; four care workers, the independent living facilitator (ILF) who organised activities and we spoke with three domestic staff, the cook and the maintenance person. We were able to speak to a GP, district nurse and occupational therapist who were visiting the service on the day of the inspection.

We reviewed the care plans, risk assessments and medicine records of three people in detail and looked at three other care plans. We observed medicines being administered on the respite unit and Willow unit. Members of the team ate with people in order to observe their experience at lunch time.

We inspected records relating to the running of the service. These included six staff recruitment and training files, the training matrix, maintenance and servicing documents and the quality assurance system.

Updated 31 March 2017

This inspection took place on the 14 and 15 March 2017 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 17 November 2015 we found a breach of Regulation 17 because there was not an effective quality assurance system in place. The registered provider had sent us an action plan in August 2016 and at this inspection we saw that improvements had been made. There was no longer a breach of regulation.

.

Prospect Mount Road is in Scarborough and provides personal care and accommodation for up to 39 people. The service is divided into four units; the Homeward unit providing rehabilitation for up to six weeks before people return home or move to another service, Willow a dementia care unit, a respite unit that accommodates people whose carers require a break and a day unit. During the inspection only the respite unit and Willow were in use. Any people who were at the service for rehabilitation were accommodated in the respite unit and all the staff from the homeward unit had been redeployed to the respite unit. There were 13 people using the respite unit and eight people in Willow unit on the day of our inspection. The service is one of thirty services run by North Yorkshire County Council.

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

People felt safe at the service. Staff had been trained in safeguarding of adults and knew what to do if they had any concerns and how to report any incidents. We saw that one person had a safeguarding plan in place whilst an alleged incident was investigated and this was being followed by staff.

Assessments identified areas where people’s health and safety may be at risk and these were acted upon. Medicines were managed safely. Accidents and incidents were managed appropriately by the service and reviewed regularly by the care services manager.

The premises were well maintained. Checks of services and equipment had been completed. The building had been adapted as far as possible to accommodate people’s needs. Where people were living with dementia adaptations to the environment had been made to assist people in way finding.

Recruitment was robust with all relevant checks completed by the registered provider before people started work. Staff numbers were sufficient to meet the needs of people who used the service and staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.

Staff had been trained in areas which supported their role. Where further training was due it had been planned with dates booked. Staff were supported through supervision and annual appraisals.

People’s communication needs were clearly identified in care records. Information was shared at regular staff, resident and managers meetings.

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People had a choice of what to eat and drink. Specific needs relating to nutrition were identified. Fluids were available to people throughout the day.

Staff were caring and compassionate and their approach was kind and friendly. They involved people in their care and gave them information and support where appropriate. People were treated with dignity.

Advocacy services were available if people needed them. One person had an independent mental capacity advocate supporting them.

Care plans reflected individuals needs clearly. They were reviewed regularly.

People took part in a variety of activities of their choice.

Complaints had been dealt with in line with the registered provider’s policy and procedure.

Where necessary the registered manager had made notifications to CQC. They worked together with other agencies to promote people’s health and wellbeing.

There was an effective quality assurance system in place which identified areas for improvement.