Archived: Peppercorns

Updated 12 July 2016

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.

This inspection took place on 27 April 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector, and one specialist advisor, with experience in the Learning Disabilities sector. Prior to our inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service. This included information from notifications of significant events received from the registered provider; and feedback from the local authority safeguarding team and commissioners.

During our inspection we observed how staff interacted with people who used the service; both in the home and when preparing to escort them on planned outings. We spoke with three of the people who used the service, the manager, and three support workers. We looked at care records for two people who used the service and reviewed how the service used the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We also looked at documents and records that related to people's care, and the management of the home. This included three individual staff recruitment and training records, as well as policies and procedures, and quality audits.

Updated 12 July 2016

The inspection took place on 27 April 2016 and was unannounced.

The Peppercorns provides accommodation for up to six people with learning and physical disabilities. On the day of our inspection there were three people living on site and two people staying for short term respite care.

There was a manager in place who had applied for registration with the Care Quality Commission. 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 Act2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

The atmosphere in the home was warm and welcoming; from the manager as well as the staff and people who used the service. The service had safe recruitment processes in place and appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work. This showed staff had been appropriately checked to make sure they were suitable and safe to work with vulnerable people.

We saw there were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs safely. The manager told us a dependency tool was used to calculate the number of staff required for each shift; however this was flexible and would be changed depending on how many people were resident. This demonstrated the service considered the numbers of staff needed to ensure people's needs were met.

Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to the safe recording, handling, storage and administration of medicines.

People were supported by suitably qualified and experienced staff. Staff received regular training which equipped them to meet the needs of the people who used the service. Supervision from the manager was in place for all staff, to monitor their performance and development needs and ensure their skills and competencies were kept up to date.

We saw each person was asked about any food preferences, and this was documented in each person's care plan. People were supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs.

We saw people were supported to express their views and were actively involved in making decisions about their day to day care, treatment and support. People’s relatives had been involved in developing care plans. People’s privacy, dignity, and independence were respected. People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

There was clear documentation in each person's care plan about their likes and dislikes. Care plans were up to date and gave a detailed picture of how each person liked to be supported.

People were offered choices throughout the day including what activities they would like to do and when.

We saw the complaints procedure was followed and complaints were acted on in a timely manner.

The manager was open to new ideas and keen to learn from others to ensure the best possible outcomes for people living within the home.

The manager regularly worked with staff providing support to people who lived at the home, which meant they had an in-depth knowledge of the people living there.

Auditing was in place; however, outcomes were not followed up. This meant the registered provider had systems in place to ensure they identified shortfalls however there was no record these were addressed; for example accidents and incidents were recorded but there was no analysis documented to identify any trends or make changes to prevent reoccurrence.