Archived: Dimensions 55 Malvern Road

Updated 13 January 2015

We carried out an inspection on 6 August 2014. This inspection was carried out by an inspector.

As part of our inspection process the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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 also checked the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notification’s received from the provider about, accidents, safeguarding alerts and deaths. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We used this information to plan what areas we were going to focus on during our inspection.

We checked the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notification’s received from the provider about, accidents, safeguarding alerts and deaths. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We did not have any concerns prior to the inspection.  

We spoke with the inspector who had carried out the previous inspection and asked the local authority’s commissioning team for their views about this home. No concerns were raised with us about the care and support people received.

At this inspection we spent time with the three people who lived at the home and observed the support that individual people received to meet their different needs over the course of the day. We also spoke with two relatives about their experiences of the home.

We spent some time with the registered manager, assistant manager and two care staff who told us about people’s support needs and what the service offered people.

We also looked at a selection of support plans for two people who used the service and management records. These records were used to review, monitor and record the improvements made to the quality of care and support that people received.

Updated 13 January 2015

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 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which looks at the overall quality of the service.

The inspection was unannounced, which meant the provider and staff did not know we were coming. 55 Malvern Road is a care home that provides personal care and support for up to four people. Care and support is provided to people with learning disabilities.  At the time of our inspection three people lived at the home.

There is a registered manager in post. We saw that they provided good leadership and was very much part of the staff team. 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.

We spent time with all the people who lived at the home and observed how staff met their needs during the day with support that reduced the risks to people’s health and wellbeing. Two relatives that we spoke with told us that their family members were safe as staff knew how to provide the support that they needed to meet their needs. We saw that this was the case as people received their medicines from staff that had the knowledge to do this and medicines were reviewed in line with any changes to people’s needs.

We found that people were treated as individuals and supported to be involved in all aspects of their life as much as possible. We observed that staff treated people with respect and communicated in a way that included people’s involvement in their care and support. This was evident at meal times and what people wanted to do in their daily lives as staff encouraged people to make their choices. This meant people were not discriminated against due to their needs and people’s independence was supported as much as possible.

Throughout the day we saw staff supported people with words of encouragement where needed when completing tasks. We saw that staff had a good rapport with people and it became evident that the staff knew people’s likes and dislikes. This enabled staff to offer effective care and support to people. This included links with health and social care professionals so that people’s needs were met in the right way, by the right person and at the right time.

Staff knew how to identify harm and abuse and knew how to act to reduce the risk of harm to which included unsafe staff practices. There were also a number of arrangements in place to promote people’s safety and support people in the right way at the right time. For example, there were sufficient staff on duty and staff recruitment checks were carried out before staff came to work at the service.

Staff showed an awareness of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. We saw that consideration was given to the Mental Capacity Act as some people did not have the ability to consent to their care and treatment. Therefore best interest decisions had been made with people who knew the person and were involved in their care and support. We also found that the management team and the staff were aware when levels of intervention or supervision may represent a deprivation of a person’s liberty.

Staff had training to enable people to be protected from the risk of infections and the premises were checked so that any repairs and or adaptations were made where needed. During our inspection we saw that the premises were homely, clean and well maintained.

We found that the care and support people received was well led. The registered manager ensured positive outcomes for people were continually developed, reviewed and improved upon when needed.