Archived: Speakers Court

Updated 2 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 checked 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.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included the provider information return (PIR), notifications and safeguarding alerts and outcomes. The PIR 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 visited the service on the 14 and 15 October 2014. The first day of the inspection was unannounced and we informed the manager that we would be returning on the second day to complete our inspection.

This inspection was carried out by one inspector. We spoke with the six people using the service, one person’s relative, the registered manager and five members of staff during the course of our visit. People were able to give us direct feedback about their care and experiences.

We looked at records about people’s care, including three files of people who used the service. We reviewed how the provider safeguarded people, how they managed complaints and checked the quality of their service. We checked records kept for staff recruitment, training, supervision and staff allocation. We looked around the premises and at records for the management of the service including quality assurance audits, action plans and health and safety records. We also checked how medicines were managed.

Updated 2 January 2015

We visited the service on 14 and 15 October 2014. The first day of the inspection was unannounced and we informed the manager that we would be returning on the second day to complete our inspection.

At the last inspection on 31 October 2013 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements around record keeping. We saw this action has been completed.

Speakers Court provides accommodation and care for up to six people with physical disabilities. The accommodation is made up of five self-contained flats which are owned by Croydon Church's Housing Association, but are managed and staffed by Scope. There were six people using the service at the time of this inspection.

There was a registered manager in post who had worked in the service since November 2013. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt safe and were given information about how to report any concerns. Staff knew how to recognise and respond to abuse correctly and had received safeguarding training. Risks to people’s health and safety were being well managed and the service encouraged people to take positive risks. People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

Staff recruitment procedures helped ensure that people were protected from unsafe care. There were enough qualified and skilled staff at the service and staff received regular training and management support to meet people’s needs.

People living at Speakers Court all had capacity to make decisions about their care. The manager and staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were supported to access healthcare services to maintain and promote their health and well-being. The service made sure health and social care professionals were involved when people became unwell or required additional services. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and monitored and people were supported to keep healthy.

Staff knew people well and supported them to maintain their hobbies and interests. Each individual  was involved in making decisions about their care and had personalised care plans that they had created. They agreed to the level of support they needed and how they wished to be supported. Their individual preferences and diverse needs were known and staff supported their choices. Where people's needs changed, the provider responded and reviewed the care provided.

Staff were aware of the values of the service and the care they provided was centred on each individual. People’s independence was recognised and encouraged; they led their chosen lifestyle and had the opportunity to make the most of their abilities. Staff showed understanding, patience and people were treated with respect and dignity.  

The environment was designed and equipped with physical aids and adaptations that people needed. Individual flats were well maintained and homely. The standards of décor and personalisation by people who used the service supported this.

People told us they found the staff and management approachable and could speak to them if they were concerned about anything. We observed an open and inclusive atmosphere in the service and the manager led by example. Staff spoke positively about how the registered manager worked well with them and encouraged team working.

People were involved in reviewing and providing feedback on the care and support they received. The provider carried out regular audits to monitor the quality and health and safety of the service and to plan improvements. Where improvements were needed, action was taken.