Qualities Services Ltd

Updated 21 May 2019

The inspection:

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:

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

Qualities Services Limited is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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.

Notice of inspection:

This was an unannounced inspection.

What we did:

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included a provider information return. This contains information providers are required to send us about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.

During the inspection we observed interactions between staff and people who used the service. We spoke with one person who used the service, one relative of a person who used the service, two members of staff and the registered manager. We looked at two people’s care plans and two staff files and we checked other records related to the management of the service such as staff rotas and audits.

Updated 21 May 2019

About the service: Qualities Services Limited is a residential care home that was providing personal care to four people with learning disabilities or acquired brain injury at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff knew how to keep people safe from harm and abuse. People had risk management plans to enable them to stay safe while doing the activities they wanted to do, although one person required a revised management plan to help ensure they interacted with visitors in a safe way.

One person with epilepsy did not have a detailed enough risk management plan to ensure staff knew how to keep them safe when they experienced seizures. However, the service managed other risks appropriately and promoted people’s independence by finding safe ways of enabling people to do potentially risky tasks for themselves. The premises were suitably adapted for the people living there and the home was clean and safe to use. Medicines were managed safely.

There were enough suitable staff to care for people safely, and staff received appropriate training and support.

People had a choice of suitable food and drink and received support to eat and drink enough to remain healthy. Staff consulted with other services, including specialist providers, to ensure people’s healthcare and other needs were met.

People were supported to have choice in their daily lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff gained people’s consent before providing care to them or, if people did not have capacity to consent, took appropriate steps to ensure care they received was in their best interests.

Staff were caring and respectful. They took the time to get to know people and their individual communication and emotional support needs. Staff respected people’s religious and cultural needs and supported them to spend time with their families and other people who were important to them. They promoted people’s privacy and dignity.

People had person-centred care plans that provided detailed information to staff about their needs, preferences, cultural backgrounds, interests, strengths and needs. People had opportunities to engage in a variety of suitable activities both at home and out in the community, including household tasks, games, hobbies and leisure activities. Staff supported people to go on holidays and day trips.

There was an appropriate complaints procedure in place. The service had not received any complaints but the registered manager used written compliments as part of monitoring the quality of the service and keeping staff motivated.

Staff, people and relatives described the registered manager as open and approachable. The manager continuously monitored the quality of the service through checks and observations, communicating any required improvements to staff and responding quickly to any concerns.

Rating at last inspection: At our last inspection, this service was rated “good.” Our last report was published on 29 October 2016.

Why we inspected: This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people receive safe, compassionate, high quality care. Further inspections will be planned for future dates.