Caretech Community Services (No 2) Limited - 42 Russell Lane

About the service

Caretech Community Services (No 2) Limited - 42 Russell Lane is a care home and is registered to provide care to up to 6 people with learning disabilities and complex needs including mental health and autism. On the day of our visit there were 6 people living in the home.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

Right Support:

Staff supported people to access health and social care support in the community. They supported people being involved in maintaining their own health and wellbeing where possible. Staff communicated with people in ways that met their needs. The service gave people care and support in a safe environment. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Risks to people were assessed, monitored and managed. Staff had the necessary skills, knowledge and experience to provide safe and effective care. There were enough staff to meet people's needs.

Right Care:

People's needs were appropriately assessed before they moved to the service. The service worked together with healthcare professionals and relatives to ensure people's needs could be met. People were supported with nutrition and hydration. Care was person-centred and promoted people's dignity, privacy and human rights. Staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. Staff were appropriately trained on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to report safeguarding concerns. Care records contained risk assessments with clear guidance for staff to follow. Medicines were managed safely. Staff were recruited safely. The premises were clean. People had a choice about their living environment and were able to personalise their rooms. Some aspects of the home needed refurbishment and the provider was taking action to address this.

Right Culture:

The registered manager promoted a person-centred environment and people experienced good outcomes. People spoke positively about the management team and staff. People received good quality care, and support because trained staff could meet their needs and wishes.

Staff understood people’s needs in relation to their strengths, impairments or sensitivities people with a learning disability and/or autistic people may have. This enabled people to receive compassionate and empowering care that was tailored to their needs. Staff knew and understood people well and were responsive, supporting their aspirations to live a quality life of their choosing.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection

At the last inspection we rated this service as good. The report was published on 1 May 2018.

Why we inspected

We carried out a focused inspection of this service on 31 January 2023, this inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe, Effective and Well Led. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information, we may inspect sooner.

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.

At our last inspection in January 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People were safe at the service. Staff knew how to identify abuse and understood the safeguarding procedures to follow to protect people from abuse. Risks to people's health and well-being were assessed and managed. Appropriate risk management systems were in place which ensured staff delivered safe care.

People's needs were met in a safe and timely manner by a sufficient number of staff. The provider followed appropriate recruitment procedures to ensure they employed staff who were suitable to provide care. People received their medicines when needed. Medicines were administered and managed safely by staff who were trained to perform that role. Health and social care professionals were involved in the planning and reviewing of people's care to ensure support provided met best practice guidance and legislation.

Staff provided care that was responsive to people's needs. Lessons were learnt from incidents and accidents. Staff were supported and trained to undertake their roles.

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. People gave consent to care and support.

People were happy that staff delivered their care in a kind and caring manner. People had developed positive working relationships with the staff who supported them.

Staff involved people in planning their care and knew their likes, dislikes and preferences. People were treated with respect and their confidentiality maintained. Staff promoted people's privacy and dignity.

People were provided with a healthy and balanced diet. Staff ensured people had sufficient amounts to eat and drink. People's health needs were met.

People took part in a range of activities. Staff supported people to develop and maintain their daily living skills.

People using the service and their relatives' views were sought about the service. The provider welcomed their feedback and made changes when necessary. People knew how to make a complaint and were confident their concerns would be resolved.

People and staff commented positively about the registered manager and how the service was managed.

There was an open and transparent culture at the service. People received care that was focussed on meeting their individual needs.

Regular audits and checks were carried out on the quality of care people received.

We inspected Caretech Community Services (No 2) Limited - 42 Russell Lane on 26 January 2016. This was an unannounced inspection. Caretech Community Services (No 2) Limited - 42 Russell Lane is a six bed care home for people with learning disabilities. On the day of our visit there were six people living in the home.

People told us they were very happy with the care and support they received.

People who needed assistance with meal preparation were supported and encouraged to make choices about what they ate and drank. The care staff we spoke with demonstrated a good knowledge of people’s care needs, significant people and events in their lives, and their daily routines and preferences. They also understood the provider’s safeguarding procedures and could explain how they would protect people if they had any concerns.

Staff told us they enjoyed working in the home and spoke positively about the culture and management of the service. Staff told us that they were encouraged to openly discuss any issues. Staff said they enjoyed their jobs and described management as supportive. Staff confirmed they were able to raise issues and make suggestions about the way the service was provided.

The registered manager had been in post since 1999. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The service was safe and there were appropriate safeguards in place to help protect the people who lived there. People were able to make choices about the way in which they were cared for. Staff listened to them and knew their needs well. Staff had the training and support they needed. There was evidence that staff and managers at the home had been involved in reviewing and monitoring the quality of the service to make sure it improved.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices were safe and relevant checks had been completed before staff worked at the home. People’s medicines were managed appropriately so they received them safely.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Appropriate mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been undertaken by relevant professionals. This ensured that the decision was taken in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005, DoLS and associated Codes of Practice.

People participated in a range of different social activities and were supported to access the local community. They also participated in shopping for the home and their own needs

The registered manager provided good leadership and people using the service, relatives and staff told us the manager promoted high standards of care.

..

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People are treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported.

Training records showed that staff had completed safeguarding adults training which involved two-yearly face to face training and e-learning once a year.

Systems were in place to protect people's money.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. This ensured that the staff were of good character and were competent enough to meet the care and welfare needs of people.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People said that they had been involved in the care planning process and that they were happy with the care that was provided.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. One person told us, 'staff always help me to do what I want.''

People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly.

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. The provider had a robust complaints procedure that was accessible to people who use the service. There had been one complaint since our last inspection and this had been dealt with in a timely and efficient manner.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

Staff told us that the manager was an 'excellent advocate' for people who use the service and 'never left any stoned unturned.'' They added, 'she is good at boosting our confidence.'

Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities, and had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

We looked at three care plans. We saw that they had recently been updated and that they included person-centred risk assessments for choking, unstable mobility and undertaking domestic tasks. We also saw individual health folders, documenting a person's medical appointments and individual medical folders documenting administration of drugs.

None of the two people we spoke with expressed concerns about the safety of the home. One person told us they were, 'happy.'

We looked at provider records and saw that the six people using the service had recently completed a pictorial user survey. We looked at survey results and saw that people agreed with the statement: 'staff listen to you and talk to you in a good way.'