We undertook an announced inspection of Yourlife Northallerton on 10 March 2015. We told the provider one day before our visit that we would be visiting. This was due to the nature of the service and to ensure people who used the service and staff were available to assist us with the inspection.
At the time of our inspection three people were receiving a personal care service.
Yourlife Northallerton was registered in July 2011, the service provides personal care services for older people living in their own homes, within a McCarthy and Stone Assisted Living Development. The Your Life (Northallerton) office is located at the Malpas Court development, near the centre of Northallerton. The Malpas Court development consists of a complex of retirement flats which people purchase, they can be supported by a number of services if they wish, there are communal areas and facilities, including a restaurant.
At our last inspection in May 2013 the service was meeting the regulations inspected.
The service had a registered manager who had been registered with the Care Quality Commission since July 2014. 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.
There were processes in place to help make sure people were protected from the risk of abuse and staff were aware of safeguarding vulnerable adults procedures.
Assessments were undertaken of risks to people who used the service and staff. Written plans were in place to manage these risks. There were processes for recording accidents and incidents. We saw that appropriate action was taken in response to incidents to maintain the safety of people who used the service.
People were kept safe and free from harm. There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service. Staff were able to accommodate last minute changes to appointments although we were told this was rare.
Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included obtaining references from previous employers and we saw evidence that a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check had been completed before they started work in the home. The Disclosure and Barring Service carry out a criminal record and barring check on individuals who intend to work with children and vulnerable adults. To help employers make safer recruiting decisions and also to prevent unsuitable people from working with children and vulnerable adults. Photographic identification was not apparent in all the files we looked at. We discussed this with the registered manger who was aware this was needed.
Staff did not receive regular training to ensure they had up to date information to undertake their roles and responsibilities. The registered manager had recognised that staff needed to receive regular training, so they were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. There were gaps in required training such as Mental Capacity Act 2005, food hygiene and infection control.
Staff were not provided with regular supervision and appraisals.
Staff knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported. People told us they liked the staff and looked forward to the staff coming to their apartments. There was evidence that people were involved in making decisions about their care and the support they received.
People were supported to eat and drink. The onsite restaurant provided lunch time meals for people who lived there. Staff encouraged people to access the community and this reduced the risk of people becoming socially isolated.
Staff were respectful of people’s privacy and maintained their dignity as well as encouraging independence.
People were supported to take their medicines by being prompted or assisted. Each persons required needs were documented in their care plans. Medication administration records were not fully completed, dates were missing and there were gaps with no explanation as to why.
We saw that the service’s complaints process was included in information given to people when they started receiving care. The complaints policy was due for review 31 December 2012, this had not happened. The policy detailed steps that were to be taken if a complaint was made with a flow chart. We saw the service had received one complaint in April 2014, this was dealt with appropriately.
Although the area manager did monthly audits, no action plan was put in place, therefore each month the same issues were occurring.
We found two breach’s of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. These regulations were replaced by the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in April 2015. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.