When we visited 35 Worth Crescent, we spoke with the registered manager, three care staff, two people who used the service and a relative of a person who accessed the service. Speaking with these people helped answer our five questions; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well led?Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.
Is the service safe?
There were five people receiving care and support in this service on the day of our inspection. We spoke with one person who lived at the home. They told us they were satisfied with the care and attention shown by staff and confirmed if they needed anything, staff would respond promptly. They said "I like it here and I look forward to coming".
People's health, safety and welfare was protected when more than one provider was involved in their care and treatment, or when they moved between different services. We found that when people had accessed hospital services the provider had translated the care plan into an easy-to-read and understandable format.
We found evidence that learning took place from incidents and investigations within the service and appropriate changes were implemented to improve the service.
The provider had taken steps to provide care in an environment that was suitable and adequately maintained. People who lived at the home were care for in a safe environment.
Is the service effective?
People told us the care they received met their needs. People told us they had been involved in planning the care they received.
Our discussions with the manager and care staff demonstrated the provider was fully aware of each person's individual care needs. Care plans and risk assessments were in place to be able to respond to frequently changing health care needs.
Is the service caring?
Some people living at the home had Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD). We saw staff interacting with people with ASD with a structured and thoughtful approach. Staff were helping people to develop social skills and manage stress.
We saw the service used schedules and timetables to give the necessary structure and visual cues to people with ASD.
Is the service responsive?
We reviewed four people's care records in detail and found they included assessments of their individual needs and contained clear guidelines for staff to follow. This ensured people's health and personal care needs were met. People's care records included a life history and a record of the individual's needs and preferences.
People had access to activities that were important to them and had been supported by staff to fully participate in the activity.
Is the service well led?
We found the home had systems in place to assure the quality of service they provided. The way the service was run had been regularly and robustly reviewed. We were satisfied that the recruitment systems the home had in place ensured people
working at 35 Worth Crescent had been suitably vetted for their posts. This meant people who lived at the home were protected from the risks associated with unsuitable staff.
Our discussions with three care staff showed there was a confidential way for them to raise concerns about risks to people, poor practice and adverse events. Staff understood the reporting system and felt confident to use it. The staff described the manager as very approachable, totally transparent and an inspirational leader.
The service benefited from effective leadership.