Background to this inspection
Updated
11 April 2019
The inspection:
‘We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.’
Inspection team:
This inspection was carried out by one inspector.
18 Boundary Road is a care home for three people with learning disabilities.
A registered manager was in post. The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
What we did:
Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service including notifications sent to us by the provider. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to send to us. We also looked at information in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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 contacted people, staff and community professionals by questionnaires and phone calls. We spoke with the registered manager, administrative staff, quality assurance manager and training manager. We consulted seven staff including one external agency worker and received feedback from six staff.
We reviewed records related to the care for three people. We looked at care records in detail, daily report, and staffing rotas. Records relating to the safety and suitability of the service were reviewed. We looked around the property.
Updated
11 April 2019
About the service:
18 Boundary Road is a small care home providing support to three people with learning disabilities.
People’s experience of using this service:
People told us they felt safe living at the service. The staff we spoke had attended training in safeguarding of people at risk. They described safeguarding procedures which included how to identify the signs of abuse and reporting of concerns.
Care plans were person centred and people were present while we reviewed their care records. They told us how they were supported by the staff.
Individual risks to people were assessed and action plans devised to ensure people were able to take positive risks. Action plans on how to minimise risks were in place for people that were identified at risk of harm.
People told us there were staff on duty at all times. Rotas confirmed additional staff were rostered three times per week to support people with maintaining their independent living skills. One member of staff was on duty at all other times.
Medicines were managed safely. People knew the purpose of their medicines. There were people who were competent to self administer their medicines and records were in place to support this decision.
The home had the appearance of a domestic dwelling. People told us they were in the process of choosing colour schemes for all areas of the home.
We were invited into people’s bedrooms and we saw their personalities reflected. People told us they participated in household chores. Cleaning schedules were in place and staff were responsible for the overall cleanliness of the home
The staff on duty told us the training officer managed all training. This member of staff said there was mandatory training set by the provider. Staff had regular one to one supervision meetings with their registered manager.
People told us menus were devised weekly. People made their own refreshments and prepared their breakfast and lunch. The evening meal was prepared by the staff.
People were supported by staff with their ongoing healthcare needs.
The abilities and skills of people had improved since our last inspection. The people we spoke with were more confident and told us how their independence had improved within the home and in the community. People made all their decisions and told us their choices were respected.
Quality assurance systems were in place. Action plans were introduced where shortfalls were identified.
Rating at last inspection:
The service was rated as Good at the comprehensive inspection dated 5 September 2016
Why we inspected:
This inspection was a scheduled inspection based on previous rating.
Follow up:
We will monitor all intelligence we receive about the service to inform when the next inspection should take place.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk