21 May 2019
During a routine inspection
The service is registered with the Care Quality Commission for the regulated activity of ‘personal care’. At the time of this inspection, a total of 108 people used the service. However, only 33 people were in receipt of support that included personal care.
People’s experience of using this service: We found a strong leadership framework in place. This meant there were clear lines of accountability within the organisation and systems which supported the running of the service were well-embedded. The service benefited from a long-standing and highly experienced registered manager. They were well supported by a dedicated and enthusiastic multidisciplinary team.
People’s care files showed that their care needs had been thoroughly assessed, and they received a good quality of care from staff who understood the type of support they needed. Care plans were highly personalised and gave clear information on how to support people beyond just their physical needs to ensure their entire person-hood was upheld. People’s goals and aspirations were clearly identified in their care records and we saw many examples where the service had helped them to fulfil these.
Staff were effective in their roles and sought the best outcomes for the people they supported. The service benefited from a range of in-house professional expertise which meant a responsive level of training and continuous development was provided in line with the person’s needs and developments in best practice.
People were given every opportunity to be valued and equal partners in decisions around their care and support. For example, people or their representatives were empowered to select the own staff team and ask questions during staff interviews. The service encouraged people to maintain a healthy diet and worked collaboratively with external services to promote people's wellbeing. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated ‘Good.’ (published 22 November 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned routine inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk