Background to this inspection
Updated
19 April 2019
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team: A single inspector carried out this inspection.
Service and service type: Anahita Recovery Centre is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care home accommodates 24 people in two units, each of which has separate adapted facilities. Anahita Recovery Centre specialises in providing care to people living with and recovering from mental ill-health.
The service had a manager 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.
What we did: Before the inspection we looked at all the information we had about the service. This information included statutory notifications that the provider had sent to CQC. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also received feedback from the local authority that commissions services from the provider and two health care professionals. We used this information to help inform our inspection planning.
During the inspection we spoke with three people to gain their views about the support they received. We looked at two people’s care files, staff recruitment and training records and records relating to the management of the service such as medicines, quality assurance audits and policies and procedures. We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager and three members of staff about how the home was being run and what it was like to work there.
Updated
19 April 2019
About the service: Anahita Recovery Centre is a care home that provides supported accommodation for up to 24 to people who have mental health needs. At the time of the inspection 22 people were using the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿ People said they felt safe. There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures.
¿ Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work and there was enough staff available to meet people’s care and support needs.
¿ Risks to people had been assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure people’s needs were safely met.
¿ People were receiving their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.
¿ The service had procedures in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infections.
¿ Assessments of people’s care and support needs were carried out before they started using the service.
¿ Staff had received training and support relevant to people’s needs.
¿ People were encouraged to cook for themselves and they were supported to maintain a balanced diet.
¿ 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.
¿ People said staff treated them in a caring and respectful manner.
¿ People had been consulted about their care and support needs.
¿ People were supported to participate in activities that met their needs.
¿ No one using the service required support with end of life care, however there were procedures in place to make sure people had access to this type of care if it was required.
¿ The service had a complaints procedure in place. People told us they knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy with the service.
¿ The provider had effective systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.
¿ The service worked in partnership with health and social care providers to plan and deliver an effective service.
¿ The provider took people views into account through satisfaction surveys and residents’ meetings. Feedback from the surveys and meetings was used to improve on the service.
¿ Staff enjoyed working at the service and said they received good support from the registered manager and deputy manager.
Rating at last inspection: Good. (Report was published on 18 October 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on 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.