• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Larkrise

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

50 The Gallop, Sutton, Surrey, SM2 5RY

Provided and run by:
Chatsworth Care

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

14/10/2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 14 October 2014 and was unannounced.

Larkrise is a small care home which provides accommodation for up to six young adults with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection there were five people, all male, living at the service. Each person had their own room with en-suite facilities. There was a large communal lounge, sensory room, kitchen, dining room and laundry room. At the rear of the home there was a large well maintained garden.

The service is required to have 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.  The registered manager on our records left the service in May 2014. We were notified at the time, by the provider. A new manager has since been appointed and had made the appropriate registered manager application to the CQC.

At the last inspection on 11 October 2013 we found the service was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Relatives told us people were safe at Larkrise. Staff knew how to protect people if they suspected they were at risk of abuse or harm. Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing had been assessed and staff knew to minimise and manage these to keep people safe from harm or injury in the home and community. The home, and equipment within it, was regularly checked to ensure it was safe. Medicines were stored and administered safely.

People were cared for by staff who received appropriate training and support to meet their needs. Staff felt supported by managers. There were enough staff to support people to live a full, active and independent life as possible in the home and community. We observed staff that supported people had a good understanding of their needs. They supported people in a way which was kind, caring, and respectful.

Staff encouraged and supported people to keep healthy and well through regular monitoring of their general health and by ensuring people attended medical and healthcare appointments. People were encouraged to eat a well-balanced, healthy and nutritious diet. Where there were any issues or concerns about a person’s health or wellbeing staff ensured they received prompt and appropriate care and attention from healthcare professionals.

Care plans were developed which reflected people’s diverse needs and their individual choices and beliefs for how they lived their lives. People’s relatives and other healthcare professionals were actively involved in supporting them to make decisions about their care and support needs. Where people were unable to make complex decisions about their care and support, staff ensured appropriate procedures were followed to ensure decisions were made in their best interests.

Relatives told us they were comfortable raising any concerns they had with staff and knew how to make a complaint if needed. They said concerns raised in the past had been listened to and dealt with responsively. 

There were systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service provided. Learning from incidents and investigations had been used to make improvements and changes to the service that people wanted or needed.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes and hospitals. The provider had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and DoLS. Staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made and in how to submit one. This helped to ensure that people were safeguarded as required by the legislation.

11 October 2013

During a routine inspection

Many of the people had complex needs and limited verbal communication skills. We were unable to speak to people using the service but we spoke with their relatives. Relatives said of the service, 'we are always consulted about everything to do with x.' 'We are happy with the care." "X is getting so much more out of life than we could give him." 'The staff know what they are doing and we have seen the difference this has made to x."

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements. We found that people's needs were assessed and care was delivered in accordance with their care plan. Care was planned to ensure people's safety and welfare.

We found that people were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration. People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink which was stored, handled and prepared appropriately.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. There were effective recruitment procedures in place and appropriate checks were carried out on staff before they began to work with people using the service. People were cared for by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

30 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with some of the people who use this service however due to their needs, they were unable to share their views about the standards of care. Nonetheless, people we met during our visit appeared to be well cared for, comfortable in their surroundings and happy with the staff team. We were informed that their relatives visit them on a regular basis and were happy with the care and support being provided by the home.