Archived: Careview Services

Updated 17 January 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 inspection took place on 28 November 2018 and was unannounced and was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. The provider submitted their PIR as required. We reviewed the information we held about the service and provider. This included the notifications that the provider had sent to us about incidents at the service and information we had received from the public. Notifications are information the provider must send us by law. We contacted any commissioners involved with the service to see if they had any information to share with us prior to the inspection.

At the time of our inspection there were 5 people living at the home. Most people that lived in the home were not able to speak with us in depth to tell us what they thought about the service they received. We spoke with four people briefly. As part of our observations we used the Short Observational Tool for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the needs of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with five staff members, registered manager and the provider’s representative. We made telephone calls with three relatives and three professionals linked to the service between Friday 30 November 2018 and Monday 3rd December 2018.

We looked at the care records of two people living at the home, two recruitment records and records related to the management of the home including audits, medication and complaints.

Updated 17 January 2019

This inspection took place on 28 November 2018 and was unannounced. We last inspected this service in August 2015 where the service was given an overall rating of good. At this latest inspection the service remained ‘Good’

Care view services is a care home which is registered to provide care to up to 6 people. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home specialises in the care of people with a learning disability and mental health support needs. All bedrooms are for single occupation. On the day of our inspection there were 5 people living at Care View Services.

The service had a registered manager who was present during our 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.

People were protected from the risks of abuse because the provider had systems in place to minimise the risk of abuse and staff were trained to identify the possibility of abuse occurring. Staff understood their responsibility to act to protect people from the risk of abuse and how to escalate any concerns they had. People were protected from risks of injury associated with their needs because risks had been identified and management plans put in place so staff had the information they needed to minimise risks.

The provider had effective procedures in place for managing the maintenance of the premises and appropriate health and safety checks were carried out.

We observed there being enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. People and their relatives told us there were enough staff on duty. There was an over reliance on agency workers however the provider stated they had recently recruited new staff members and would continue to do so. They added that the long-term plan is to have a full team of 11 permanent staff and use agency workers as a contingency.

People’s consent was sought by staff. 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 supported this practice.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence. Staff were caring and compassionate towards people living at the home. People were given choices by staff to participate in activities. People who used the service had access to food and drinks and were supported to have food they enjoyed.

People, their relatives and health care professionals had been involved in the planning for their care needs. Care plans and risk assessments provided clear information and guidance for staff on how to support people to meet their needs.

People and relatives had confidence that they received a good standard of care. The provider had systems to allow them to monitor and improve the service as well as ensure potential risks were well managed. People’s views were sought by the provider and these were acted upon. Staff felt well supported by the management team. The provider understood their legal responsibilities and how to maintain a current knowledge of any changes in the law or social care.