Archived: Drayton Road

Updated 25 March 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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection team included two inspectors and one 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 the information that we held about the service. This included statutory notifications including safeguarding concerns, two previous inspection reports and details of the registered manager. We also contacted the local authority safeguarding team.

During the inspection we spoke with all six people living at the home, three relatives, six members of staff, one volunteer and the registered manager of the service. We also reviewed five people's care files and three staff records, including recruitment information, accident and incident logs, safeguarding folder, health and safety documents, quality audits and supervision and appraisal records.

Updated 25 March 2015

We inspected Drayton Road on 4 and 5 February 2015. This was an unannounced inspection which meant the staff and the provider did not know we would be visiting. At the last inspection in August 2013 the service was found to be meeting the regulations we looked at.

Drayton Road provides accommodation and personal care for adults with learning disabilities. At the time of inspection there were six people living in the home. The service had a registered manager. 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 good procedures for safeguarding adults. Staff knew the types of abuse, what signs to look out for and how to report any concerns they had.

People had risk assessments that set out potential risks and had clear guidance for staff for managing these risks to keep people safe. People's care plans reflected these risks and provided a good structure for support.

There was sufficient staff to provide personalised care for people using the service. We saw enough staff to enable people to go out with support and for others to remain in the home.

Medicines were managed safely and were recorded properly. We saw that the medicines were audited each month and the stocks were correct when we checked them.

Staff were well supported and all had a structured induction and received regular supervision and appraisals. We saw there was a range of training available for staff, and they told us they had received regular training and were able to ask for additional support when they needed it.

Managers and staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff demonstrated an understanding of these and worked in line with the code of practice when supporting people.

People liked the food they were provided with, and were given a choice about what they had. We saw they were supported to cook for themselves and given the help they needed to do this as independently as possible.

Staff had good, caring relationships with people using the service. We observed good standards of care and caring interactions while staff were providing support.

People were actively involved in the running of the home. We saw details of regular house meetings to get feedback about the service and involve people in making decisions about the running of the home.

Care plans were personalised to each individual's needs. Each person had a needs assessment which was reflected within the care plan, stating their preferences and details of how they wanted to receive their care.

People who used the service, their relatives and staff all felt able to speak to the manager about any issues and give their feedback and ideas for improvement to them. They knew how to make a complaint and there was a policy and procedure in place for responding to complaints.

We saw there were regular audits completed to monitor the quality of the service and to plan improvements. We saw that people using the service were given surveys to complete and these had been used to plan changes to the service. People had also been involved in recruiting new care staff and were able to have a say in the development of the service.