Archived: Marlborough House

Updated 9 October 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.

This inspection took place on 17 July 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

The provider completed a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give key information about the service for example what the service does well and any improvements they intend to make. Before the inspection we examined previous inspection records and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.

We spoke with seven people, one relative and three staff. We looked at the care records for nine people, including their care plans and risk assessments. We looked at staff recruitment files, medicine records, minutes of meetings and documents relating to the monitoring of the service.

Updated 9 October 2015

Marlborough House provides care and support for up to 12 people with a learning disability. At the time of our visit there were 12 people living at Marlborough House.

The inspection was unannounced and took place on the 17 July 2015.

The home had a registered manager in place. 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 requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about the service is run.

People told us they felt safe living at Marlborough House and that the staff helped them to feel safe and secure in their home. There were systems in place to reduce the risks to people and protect them from harm.

The service had in place robust recruitment procedures which ensured that staff had the appropriate skills, background and qualifications for the role. There were enough suitably trained and supported staff available to support people during our inspection.

There were effective systems in place to ensure that medicines were stored, managed and administered safely. People received appropriate support to take their medicines.

Staff told us they felt supported by the management of the service and that the training they received provided them with a good understanding of topics such as the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People and their relatives spoke highly of the staff.

The service was complying with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the DoLS. Appropriate DoLS applications had been made where required and assessments of people’s capacity were completed appropriately. People were supported to make decisions independently and were encouraged to develop independent living skills.

People were encouraged and supported to take part in many activities they enjoyed, within the service and outside of the service.

People told us the staff were caring and kind towards them.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to identify shortfalls or areas for improvement. There was an open culture at the service. People using the service, their relatives and staff were given the opportunity to express their views and these were acted on by the service. There was a complaints procedure in place and people told us they knew how to make a complaint if they weren’t happy.