Archived: The Garden Site Underley

Updated 5 March 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 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.

This inspection took place on 4 January 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of a lead adult social care inspector.

Before we carried out our inspection we looked at information we held about the service. This included the statutory notifications we had received from the provider. Statutory notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send CQC within required timescales. We also asked a local commissioner for their feedback.

We also looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR) we had asked the provider to submit to us prior to the inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

There were three people living at the service when we carried out our inspection. People living there had complex needs and could not easily share their views with us. During our visit we met one person however they did not wish to speak with us and we visited two of the individual homes at the location.

We also contacted some relatives to ask them for their comments about the service. We observed how staff interacted with people and spoke with two staff, the registered and deputy manager of the service. We looked at the care records for all three people, staff training records and records relating to how the service was managed.

Updated 5 March 2018

This comprehensive inspection took place on 4 January 2018 and was unannounced. At our last inspection in July 2016 of the service we found a breach of Regulation12 Safe Care and treatment of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.This was because records relating to the safe management and administration of medicines were not always accurate or completed in full.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question safe to at least good. At this inspection we found that the provider had completed those actions we found the service was meeting the fundamental standards of quality and safety.

The Garden Site is a ‘care home’. 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.

The Garden Site is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to eight adults with learning disabilities and or autism. The provider had recently submitted an application to vary their registration to accommodate four adults. On the day of this inspection there were three people living in individual properties on the site. The service is situated near the town of Kirkby Lonsdale.

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.

Medicines were being administered and recorded appropriately and were being kept safely.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs. Staff training was on going and people had received sufficient training to safely support and care for people. Staff were supported by the registered and deputy manager through regular staff meetings, supervision and appraisals.

We saw that the service worked well with a variety of external agencies and health professionals to provide appropriate care and support to meet people’s physical and emotional health needs.

Where safeguarding concerns or incidents had occurred these had been reported by the registered manager to the appropriate authorities and we could see records of the actions that had been taken by the home to protect people.

When employing fit and proper persons the recruitment procedures had included all of the required checks of suitability.

People’s rights were protected. The registered manager was knowledgeable about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were only deprived of their liberty if this had been authorised by the appropriate body or where applications had been made to do so.

Hazards to people’s safety had been identified and managed. People were supported to access activities that were made available to them and pastimes of their choice.

People’s dignity and privacy were actively promoted by the staff supporting them.

People were treated with respect and their relatives made very positive comments about the staff team who supported them.

Auditing and quality monitoring systems were in place that allowed the service to demonstrate effectively the safety and quality of the provision.

The focus of the service was on promoting people’s rights. 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.