Archived: Mears Care Darlison Court

Updated 27 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 comprehensive inspection took place on 8 February 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection because we needed to be sure that people who used the service would be available.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, we reviewed information we held about the service, which included notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law. We also contacted Local Authority commissioners of adult social care services and Healthwatch and asked them for their views of the service provided.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

The inspection was informed by both the feedback received from the people and staff we spoke with during the inspection as well as feedback from questionnaires. We sent 21 questionnaires out to people who used the service, relatives and staff. We received seven responses. The majority of those response were positive about this service.

During the inspection process, we spoke with six people who used the service and one relative. We also spoke with three members of the care staff, a supervisor and the registered manager.

We looked at all or parts of the records relating to five people who used the service as well as staff recruitment records. We looked at other information related to the running of and the quality of the service. This included quality assurance audits, training information for care staff, staff duty rotas, meeting minutes and arrangements for managing complaints.

After the inspection, we asked the registered manager to provide us with their training matrix and a revised ‘as needed’ medicines protocol. The registered manager sent these within the requested timeframe.

Updated 27 March 2018

We carried out an announced inspection of the service on 8 February 2017. This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

People using the service lived in 10 ordinary flats in one building in Hucknall, Nottingham. Other people who did not receive personal care services, also lived in this building.

A registered manager was present during the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Mears Care Darlison Court currently supports 10 people who receive some element of support with their personal care. This is the service’s first inspection under its current registration.

People felt safe when staff supported them. Staff knew who to contact if they had concerns about people’s safety. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and acted on. Safe staff recruitment processes were in place. Enough staff were available to meet people’s needs. Safe medicine management processes were in place and people received their prescribed medicines safely. A review of the use of ‘as needed’ medicines was carried out following our inspection. Staff understood how to reduce the risk of the spread of infection. Processes were in place to investigate accidents and incidents appropriately.

People’s care was provided in line with current legislation and best practice guidelines, without discrimination. Staff were well trained and their performance was regularly assessed. People’s food and drink intake was monitored to ensure conditions such as diabetes were managed effectively. Effective relationships with external health and social care organisations were in place and people’s health was regularly monitored. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; there were policies and systems in the service support this practice. However, we did note the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had not been correctly applied when decisions were made for one person.

People felt staff treated them well and were kind, caring and respectful. Staff were compassionate and offered people reassurance when needed. Information about how to contact an independent advocate was available in communal areas but not in people’s homes. Staff treated people with dignity and formed positive relationships with them. People’s confidential records were treated respectfully and stored securely.

Prior to starting with the service, people’s needs were assessed and care plans developed to enable staff to respond to their needs. Staff monitored people’s changing health well. External professionals were requested to offer guidance and support for people and staff. People’s individual preferences had been taken into account when their care was planned. People’s cultural and religious needs were discussed with them and staff were aware of the support needed with this. People were treated equally, without discrimination and systems were in place to support people who had communication needs. People felt able to make a complaint and were confident it would be dealt with appropriately.

People felt their opinions mattered and told us they enjoyed living at Darlison Court. Staff enjoyed their jobs and felt valued. Excellent staff performance was rewarded. People and staff told us they would recommend this service to others. The registered manager was well liked and worked hard to implement the provider’s values into the service. The registered manager and the provider continually looked to improve the service. Quality assurance processes were in place and these were effective.