Archived: Dimensions 22 Mill Croft

Updated 14 August 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 registered 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 21 July 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, we checked our records to see what notifications had been sent to us. This provided us with information about how the registered manager dealt with incidents that affected the people who used the service. We also contacted the local authority safeguarding and commissioning teams. They told us there were no outstanding concerns with the service.

During the inspection we observed how staff interacted with people who used the service and how they administered medicines. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with the registered manager and four care support workers. Following the inspection we spoke with three relatives, a social worker, a district nurse and a regular visitor to the service.

We looked at daily recording of care and support provided to all four people who used the service and assessed two care support files in depth. We also looked at other important documentation relating to the four people who used the service such as their medication administration records [MARs]. We looked at how the service used the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that when people were assessed as lacking capacity to make their own decisions, best interest meetings were held in order to make important decisions on their behalf.

We looked at a selection of documentation relating to the management and running of the service. These included two staff recruitment files, training records, the staff rota, minutes of meetings with staff and those with people who used the service, quality assurance audits and maintenance of equipment records.

Updated 14 August 2015

This unannounced inspection took place on 21July 2015. At the last inspection on 10 July 2013, the registered provider was compliant with all the regulations we assessed.

Dimensions 22 Mill Croft is a purpose built single storey home for up to six people with a learning disability, although only four people are resident there at present. It is situated in a residential setting and close to local facilities. The home has six single bedrooms, a bathroom, a kitchen, a laundry and a large lounge/dining room. However, one of the bedrooms has been made into a sensory room and another into a store room. There is a garden at the rear of the property and car parking at the front.

The service had 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.

We found people lived in a safe environment. Staff completed risk assessments to ensure there was guidance in how to minimise the risks posed to people from their environment and from daily living tasks. Equipment used in the service was checked and maintained.

Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from the risk of abuse or harm. There were policies and procedures to guide them in what to do if they witnessed abuse or they had any concerns about poor practice.

We found there were sufficient staff employed in the service to meet people’s current needs. Staff had been recruited safely and received an induction, training and on-going supervision to ensure they were confident when supporting the people who used the service.

We found people had their health care needs met and had access to a range of professionals in the community. People received their medicines as prescribed, which helped to maintain their health.

Staff supported people to make choices. We found when people had been assessed as lacking capacity to make their own decisions, staff had worked within best practice and current legislation. There was a bath but no shower, which could potentially limit people’s choices. This was mentioned to the registered manager to address in future redecoration and refurbishment plans.

We observed people enjoyed their meals and were supported appropriately by staff when required.

We found people were treated with dignity and respect and supported to be as independent as possible. Their needs were assessed and care was provided in a person-centred way. The staff approach was observed as sensitive, caring and friendly. People took part in activities within the house and accessed external facilities to help them take part in community life.

We found there was a system to monitor the quality of service provided to people who used the service. This included analysing accidents and incidents so learning could take place to prevent reoccurrence. Checks were carried out by senior managers so they could assure themselves of the quality of care delivered to people.

We found the environment was clean and tidy and suitable for people’s needs. Some exposed woodchip in the kitchen would make kitchen surfaces and cupboards difficult to keep clean and some areas of the garden needed tidying. This was mentioned to the registered manager to raise with maintenance personnel.