Archived: 4 Piggy Lane

Updated 7 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 checked whether the provider was 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 the 16 June 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of three inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is somebody who has experience of using this type of service.

At the time of the inspection there were 10 people being supported by the service. We reviewed the information we held about the service. This included notifications about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We spoke with one person who used the service and conducted two SOFI observations (short observation framework for inspection). A SOFI allows us to observe the experience of people who are not able to communicate with us verbally. We spoke with two people’s relatives and a visiting professional. We also spoke with six care staff, two senior carers, two regional managers and the registered manager.

Updated 7 August 2015

We inspected 4 Piggy Lane on 16 June 2015. 4 Piggy Lane is a service providing a home for people with profound learning and or physical disabilities. The service is provided in two bungalows. One at 4 Piggy Lane and one at 8 Piggy Lane. Each can provide accommodation, care and support for five people.

At the last inspection on 22 September 2015 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements in relations to their records. Records were always accurate or robust in ensuring people’s needs were understood or monitored effectively. The provider sent us an action plan stating they would have met the desired standard by December 2014. At this inspection we found that improvement had been made but improvement was still required.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

The service had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. However, there was not always enough detail provided to show how effective these systems were. These systems had also not identified the areas for improvement found on this inspection.

People’s decision making was supported by an adherence to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) (2005). The MCA is a legal framework that ensures people’s ability to make their own choices is adhered to. However, evidence of people’s capacity being assessed was not always on people’s care records regarding areas where decisions were being made for them.

The were positive relationships between people and staff and we observed a number of caring interactions. People were supported to communicate using communication passports designed with staff and with the involvement of people. 

People’s needs were clearly documented and risks associated with those needs were recorded along with guidance for staff to follow. There were enough suitably qualified staff to meet people’s needs. Staff received effective support and training to carry out their roles. Staff also had access to relevant training along with further opportunities to develop professionally.

Staff were described as caring and these descriptions matched our observations of staff who demonstrated a positive relationship with the people they supported. People’s needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. When people’s needs changed the service responded. The service also responded to complaints and concerns appropriately and in line with the services policy.