Archived: 13a The Green Rd

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. We have written this inspection report in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People continued to receive a safe service. Staff protected people as far as possible from discrimination, abuse and harm. The registered manager assessed potential risks to people. They put plans in place so that staff knew how to minimise risk without taking away each person’s right to take risks. The provider employed enough staff, who were suitable to work in this service, so that they could meet people’s diverse and changing needs. Staff gave people their prescribed medicines safely. The staff team learnt from any accidents and incidents.

People continued to receive an effective service. Staff received training and support, which equipped them to do their job well. Senior staff assessed people’s needs before offering the person a service. Staff supported people to eat and drink enough and to maintain their health. 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.

People continued to receive care and support from staff who cared about them. Staff were kind, compassionate and respected people’s privacy and dignity. They knew people well and supported people to remain as independent as possible. Staff welcomed people’s relatives and visitors.

People continued to receive a service that was responsive to their needs. People were fully involved in planning their care and support. Support plans were personalised and gave information from the person’s perspective. Staff arranged outings if people wanted to join in and supported people to join in community activities. The registered manager dealt appropriately with complaints.

The service continued to be well-led, by a registered manager who provided good, hands-on leadership. They monitored all aspects of the service for quality and put actions in place to address any shortfalls. There was an open, person-centred culture. The provider sought the views of people, their relatives and staff and these views were taken into account to ensure continuous improvement. The service worked in partnership with organisations such as the local mental health trust to provide people with joined-up care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Staff were knowledgeable about reporting any abuse. There were a sufficient number of staff and recruitment procedures ensured that only suitable staff were employed. Risk assessments were in place and actions were taken to reduce identified risks.

There were effective procedures in place to ensure that people were safely assisted with their medicines.

The provider was acting in accordance with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and staff had received training and had an understanding of the MCA and DoLS.

Staff were supported and trained to do their job and additional training was provided for specific care needs to be fully met. The staff were in contact with a range of health care professionals to ensure that care and support was well coordinated. Risk assessments were in place to help ensure that care and support could be safely provided.

People’s privacy and dignity were respected and their support was provided in a caring and a patient way.

People were supported, where required, to ensure they ate and drank sufficient quantities. People had the choice to eat their favourite foods where and when they wanted to.

Care and support was provided based on people’s individual personal and social care needs. There was a process in place so that people’s concerns and complaints were listened to and these were acted upon.

The provider had quality assurance processes and procedures in place to monitor the quality and safety of people’s care. People were able to make suggestions in relation to the support and care provided.