Background to this inspection
Updated
2 March 2019
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.
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.
This inspection took place on 5 February 2019 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice. We announced the inspection because we wanted to ensure someone would be available to support us during the inspection. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Before the inspection, we reviewed relevant information that we had about the provider including any notifications of safeguarding or incidents affecting the safety and wellbeing of people. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. The provider did not complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) because of technical reasons. PIR 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 contacted social and health care professionals for their feedback about the quality of the service.
During our inspection, we spoke with a member of care staff, the registered manager and an advocate. An advocate is an independent person who represents and speaks on behalf of a person using the service. We did not speak with people using the service because they were not able to communicate with us. However, we spent time observing people receiving care and looked at their care records. This included their care plan, risk assessment and daily notes. We reviewed three staff personnel files. This included their recruitment, training, and supervision records. After the inspection we spoke with a relative of a person the service supported by telephone. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service.
Updated
2 March 2019
We carried out an announced inspection of Corbett Care on 5 February 2019. Corbett Care is a ‘care home’ and provides accommodation and support with personal care for up to ten people with a learning disability. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
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 the time of the inspection there were a limited number of people using the service.
The service had a registered manager in place. 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.
At our last comprehensive inspection on 10 July 2017 we rated the service overall 'Requires Improvement', as well as in the areas of Safe, Effective, and Well-led. This was because we identified one breach of legal requirement as the provider did not ensure the proper and safe management of medicines. We also identified staff did not have appropriate understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and that the service did not have a registered manager in place to ensure the quality of the service was monitored and improvements were made as required.
At this inspection we found there were no breaches of the regulations of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, and we rated the service overall as Good. We found that the registered manager had made improvements in all areas of concerns we identified at the last inspection. However, at this inspection we found that parts of the premises were in disrepair, had tiles which were missing and carpets which were stained. We recommended that the registered manager needed to make improvements in these areas.
Staff understood their responsibilities regarding the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). 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.
Staff received the training and support that they required to carry out their roles in meeting people’s individual needs and supporting their independence.
People’s medicines were managed safely. Staff liaised with healthcare and social care professionals to ensure that people’s health, medical and care needs were met by the service.
Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and engaged with them in a respectful, sensitive and encouraging manner. Staff had a caring approach to their work and understood the importance of treating people with dignity, protecting people's privacy and respecting their differences and human rights.
There were arrangements in place to ensure people were safe in the service. Risk assessments were completed and staff knew how to manage risks to ensure people were safe.
People's care plans were up to date and personalised. They included details about people’s needs and preferences, and guidance for staff to follow so people received the care and support they needed.
People had the opportunity to take part in a range of activities that met their interests and needs.
Staff recruitment procedures were robust ensuring that staff employed were appropriately checked and were suitable to work with people. There were enough to support and meet people's needs.
People using the service were supported and encouraged to choose their meals. Their dietary needs and preferences were accommodated by the service.
People’s relatives knew how to raise a complaint and were confident that any concerns would be taken seriously.
Various aspects of the service were monitored and improvements made through ongoing auditing processes.
Incidents and accidents were monitored, recorded and lessons learnt to make further improvements.