Archived: Ansar 4

Updated 13 February 2016

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 was an announced inspection. One day prior to the inspection, we contacted the provider and told them of our plans to carry out a comprehensive inspection of the service. This was because the location is a small care home for one younger adult who may have been out during the day; we needed to be sure that they would be in.

The inspection took place on 17 and 21 December 2015. The inspection was undertaken by one adult social care inspector.

Before our inspection, we looked at the information we held about the service such as notifications. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law. We also contacted local authority commissioning, quality assurance and safeguarding teams. They had no concerns about the service.

During our inspection we spent some time with the person who used the service and staff. This enabled us to observe how people’s care and support was provided. We also spoke with one relative, the team manager, activity manager/coach and three staff.

We looked at one care record, three staff personnel files, staff training records, duty rotas, policies and procedures, quality assurance audits and other records about how the service was managed.

Updated 13 February 2016

This was an announced inspection, which took place on 17 and 21 December 2015. One day prior to the inspection, we contacted the provider and told them of our plans to carry out a comprehensive inspection of the service. This was because the location is a small care home for one younger adult who may have been out during the day; we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

Ansar 4 is a terraced house on a main road on the outskirts of Radcliffe. It is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for one person with learning disabilities.

The service has a registered manager who was not present on the day of the inspection. 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.

Policies and procedures were in place to safeguard people from abuse and staff had received training in safeguarding adults. Staff were able to tell us how to identify and respond to allegations of abuse. They were also aware of the responsibility to ‘whistle blow’ on colleagues who they thought might be delivering poor practice to people.

A safe system of recruitment was in place which helped protect the person from the risk of unsuitable staff. We found that the person was supported by a small team of staff who they liked and who knew the person well. There were sufficient staff at all times to ensure the person had the support they required.

The service had a positive approach to risk management. Person centred risk assessments were in place that supported staff to manage risk in a positive way. They also gave staff guidance on how to promote the person’s independence whilst managing risks.

There was a safe system in place for managing the person’s medicines.

The home was clean, bright, and well decorated it was homely and contained lots of the personal belongings and photographs. Systems were in place for dealing with emergencies that could affect the provision of care such as failure of gas and electric supply. The person’s rights and choices were respected. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff supported the person in a way that encouraged them to make choices.

Staff had received the induction, training and supervision they required to ensure they had the skills and knowledge needed to carry out their roles effectively.

Staff and managers we spoke with demonstrated a commitment to person centred care and to continually reviewing the service to ensure it was meeting the person’s needs. They used a variety of ways of involving the person and of finding out what they wanted from the service.

The service had detailed guidance for staff on how to support the person when they showed behaviour that challenged the service. This included understanding how the person communicated and guided staff on how to respond. A communication passport was used to identify what the person meant when using signs, gestures and sounds.

The relative we spoke with felt the staff and managers were caring. During our inspection, we saw that the person liked the staff that were supporting them and enjoyed the gentle humour they used. We saw staff were kind, relaxed and sensitive to the person’s needs.

Care records were detailed and person centred. They contained detailed information about the person and what staff needed to do to support them. These included a person centred plan that had information about people, places and things that the person liked and things the person didn’t like also their “gifts and talents” and their dreams and wishes for the future. This contained pictures and graphics to help the person understand what it was about

There was a varied programme of activities both inside the home and in community settings that was based on the person’s interests and hobbies. Staff regularly supported people to visit relatives and friends outside of the home.

We found there was a system in place for quality assurance. Weekly and monthly checks and audits were used to assess, monitor and review the service. We saw there was a system for gathering people’s views about the service and acting upon suggestions and ideas. Relatives felt listened to and were involved in improving the service.

People spoke positively about the registered manager and managers within the service and of their caring and person centred approach. Staff told us they enjoyed working for the service and felt supported in their roles.