Archived: Life Opportunities Trust - 15 Rose Vale

Updated 9 December 2020

The inspection

This was a targeted inspection to check whether the provider had made the required improvements following the last inspection. We will assess all of the key question at the next comprehensive inspection of the service.

Inspection team

This inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

Service and service type

Life Opportunities Trust - 15 Rose Vale is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager who was applying to be 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. However, they were absent at the time of the inspection and the home was managed by an interim manager who had been in post for three weeks.

Notice of inspection

We gave five minutes notice so we could clarify the services COVID-19 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) practice for visiting professionals and identify persons who were shielding so we could respond accordingly.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We did not request a provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection. We had requested information from the provider prior to the inspection and this information was used as part of the inspection plan.

During the inspection

We spoke with four members of staff including the interim manager. We spoke with two people who used the service and received feedback from two relatives. We contacted the local authority for their feedback.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 9 December 2020

About the service

Life Opportunities Trust – Rosevale is a care home registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up eight older people living with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection eight people were living at Life Opportunities Trust – Rosevale.

The service had not been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service did not always receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that was appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were not always protected from the risk of harm. When people sustained unexplained bruises or skin tears these were not investigated or reported to external safeguarding authorities. Lessons following incidents, accidents or complaints were not shared and used to improve practise.

Recruitment checks did not fully assess a staff member suitability for the role they were working in.

Staff had not received consistent support from management or specific training to understand the needs of the people they supported. Staff competency and skills had been rarely reviewed.

The outcomes for people did not fully reflect the principles and values of Registering the Right Support. This is because people were not treated with dignity and respect at all times. There had been some improvements in supporting people to participate in activities, but some people were not always supported to help them experience positive, meaningful daily lives that promoted their independence and wellbeing.

The registered manager had not investigated or responded to complaints raised. People were not always provided with information in an accessible format they could understand.

The provider failed to ensure that people received a good quality service in a personalised and safe way. People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.

The governance systems in place were not used effectively to identify areas for development and to improve the service. Staff had been unable to share their views and opinions on the management of the service, or ideas to develop care.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff. People’s medicines were managed safely.

People’s needs were assessed prior to the moving to the service to ensure their needs could be met.

Staff and relatives were positive about the changes in the management team, and supportive of the very recent improvements made in the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update:

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 04 December 2018). At this inspection we found that the provider was in breach of regulations. This service has been rated requires improvement for the last two consecutive inspections.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement

We have identified breaches in relation to keeping people safe from harm, staffing, responding to complaints, good governance and duty of candour at this inspection.

Follow up

We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.