Archived: Santa Maria

During our inspection we found the provider had taken action to ensure people were protected from the risk and spread of infection. Guidelines about infection prevention and control were available for staff to follow. All staff had received refresher training in infection prevention and control.

The provider had taken action to ensure people's records were stored securely and could be located promptly when requested. Records for people and staff were accurate and fit for purpose. We found records were kept for the appropriate period of time and then destroyed securely.

The provider had implemented measures to improve the recruitment and selection process. We found all the required pre-employment checks were completed. This meant the provider had an effective recruitment process, to ensure that people who use the service were not placed at risk of being cared for by staff who were not suitable for the role.

People were not always protected from the risk of specific infections because guidelines about infection prevention and control were unavailable for staff to follow. Staff had not received refresher training in infection prevention and control.

The home was secure and care workers had to use a key to enter the home. Visitors were asked for identification before being allowed entry.

We found the building was well maintained and suitable for people who use the service. We found corridors and fire exits were free of clutter and easily accessible. Necessary checks were completed to ensure the safety of people who use the service and staff.

All the required information checks were in place prior to the employment of staff with the exception of proof of conduct checks and full employment histories. The provider was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation for these gaps in employment histories. This meant the provider did not have an effective recruitment process, to ensure that people who use the service were not placed at risk of being cared for by staff who were not suitable.

People's records could be located promptly when requested but were not always accurate and fit for purpose.

We spoke with the person managing the service on the day of our inspection. The location did not have a registered manager at the time of our inspection. This is a requirement for registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The care home manager told us they had started the application process for becoming a registered manager with the CQC.

We saw evidence of person centred planning and service delivery and observed staff interacting with the people who used the service in a respectful way, giving them information and choices where appropriate.

There was evidence of the engagement of family members, advocates, care managers and health professionals in the lives of the people who used the service. There was a comprehensive system for planning services and supporting people including guidelines and records of activities and events.

There was a small and stable staff team, most of whom had worked at the service for some time and the staff knew the people well. The staff we spoke to were all very positive about the service and demonstrated that they were knowledgeable, including awareness of safeguarding for which there was a local procedure and information available. Most of the staff had appropriate national vocational qualifications (NVQs) or similar.

The provider had in place systems for monitoring the quality of service including monthly audits by the provider's Business Development Manager as well as external monitoring by the local authority.