Background to this inspection
Updated
21 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 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.
We visited the service on 21 October 2014. The inspection team consisted of one inspector. This was an unannounced inspection.
Prior to our inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports, information received and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.
We contacted commissioners (who fund the care for some people) of the service and healthcare professionals and asked them for their views. Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a 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.
During our inspection we spoke with two people who were using the service, three relatives, three members of care staff and the provider. The registered manager was not present during our inspection. We also observed the way staff cared for people in the communal areas of the building. We looked at the care plans of two people and any associated daily records such as the daily log and incident records. We looked at four staff files as well as a range of records relating to the running of the service.
Updated
21 January 2015
This inspection took place on 21 October 2014. Jubilee House provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people with a learning disability. On the day of our inspection six people were using the service.
The service had a registered manager. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe living at the care home. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. People received their medication when they needed it and medication was safely stored.
People were supported by a sufficient number of staff and effective recruitment and selection procedures were operated to ensure staff were safe to work with vulnerable adults.
People received support from health care professionals when needed and staff had the knowledge and skills to care for people safely.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. The DoLS is part of the MCA, which is in place to protect people who lack capacity to make certain decisions because of illness or disability. DoLS protects the rights of such people by ensuring that if there are restrictions on their freedom these are assessed by professionals who are trained to decide if the restriction is needed. We found this legislation was being used correctly to protect people who were not able to make their own decisions about the care they received. We also found staff were aware of the principles within the MCA and had not deprived people of liberty without applying for the required authorisation.
People had access to sufficient quantities of food and drink. The people we spoke with told us they enjoyed the food and were involved in selecting dishes to go on the menu.
People were treated with dignity and respect by staff. People who used the service told us they felt staff were always kind and respectful to them. People were able to be involved in the planning and reviewing of their care.
People gave their opinions on how the service was run and there were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. These resulted in improvements to the service where required.