Background to this inspection
Updated
28 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 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. The inspection was announced and was undertaken by one adult social care inspector.
Prior to the inspection we looked at the information we had about the service. This included notifications that had been submitted by the service. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to report to us. We also looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR) that had been submitted on 29 September 2017. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they planned to make. We reviewed the information included in the PIR and used it to assist in our planning of the inspection.
During our inspection we spoke with one of the people who was assisted by the service and observed the other person with a support worker. We spoke with the relative of one person who was supported by the service. We also spoke with four care and support workers and the registered manager.
We looked at the care records for the two people who were supported, three staff employment records and training records, policies and procedures, audits, quality assurance reports and minutes of meetings.
We received feedback from two social care professionals after our inspection. Their comments have been included in the main body of the report and have supported our findings.
Updated
28 March 2018
Maryfield, the registered location, provides the regulated activity of personal care to young adults who live within this supported housing complex. The care provider works in partnership with an educational trust to help young people with learning disabilities to develop life skills and live as independently as possible. The two services combine living with learning to create the people they support with experiences and opportunities.
The inspection was announced. We gave the registered manager 48 hours notice of the inspection. We did this to ensure key staff and people who were supported with personal care, were available for the inspection. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to two young people – the other eight ‘tenants’ received housing and social support only.
The last inspection of the service was in September 2016. At that time the service was rated as Requires Improvement. There was one breach of the regulations : Regulation 18 Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulation 2009 – Notification of other incidents.
Following the inspection we told the provider to send us an action plan detailing how they would ensure they met the requirements of that regulation. At this inspection we saw the provider had taken action as identified in their action plan and improvements had been made. In addition they had sustained previous good practice. As a result of this inspection the service has an overall rating of Good.
Why the service is rated Good.
There was a registered manager in post at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. 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. The registered manager is also responsible for registered services run from two other nearby care services.
The service people received was safe. There were effective safeguarding systems in place and all staff had received safeguarding training. Staff knew what to do if safeguarding concerns were suspected or witnessed. Safe recruitment procedures ensured unsuitable workers were not employed. Any risks to people’s health and welfare were assessed and management plans put in place to reduce or eliminate that risk. There were sufficient numbers of care and support workers employed to meet people’s needs.
Where people were supported with their medicines this was done safely. Staff received safe administration of medicines training and their competency to support people properly was reviewed. The staff took appropriate measures to prevent and control any spread of infections.
The service was effective. People’s care and support needs were assessed prior to taking up tenancy at Maryfield. This was to ensure the supported living environment and care services were appropriate to meet care and support needs. The care and support workers were well trained and had regular supervision sessions with the registered manager.
People were supported with meal preparation where this had been identified as one of their care and support needs. In order to assist people to gain life skills, the care and support workers helped them undertake these tasks independently. People were supported to access any health care services they required.
People’s capacity to make decisions for themselves regarding their care and support was assessed and kept under review. The staff were aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood their roles and responsibilities in supporting people to make their own choices and decisions.
People received a caring service. The care and support workers were passionate about supporting the people they worked with. People were treated with kindness, respect and dignity. People were including in making decision about their care and in planning the care and support they received.
The service was responsive and provided each person with a person centred service. Each person had a person centred plan of care and support and the staff team were able to provide this support flexibly. There was continuity of care as the staff team was small. Feedback was gathered from people regarding their views and experience of the service they received. Action was taken if people had complaints or concerns. The service used feedback to improve care delivery in response to people’s views and opinions and drive forward improvements.
The service provided was well led because of the good leadership and management in place. The quality and safety of the service people received was assessed and monitored and any areas needing improvement were identified and addressed.