This inspection took place on 11 October 2016 and was unannounced. A second day of inspection took place on 12 October 2016 and was announced. The service was last inspected on July 2013 and met the regulations we inspected against at that time.Housing & Care 21 – Badminton Gardens provides an 'extra care' service to people living in their own flats. There were 63 flats. Extra care housing supports people to live as independently as possible, with the reassurance of onsite care support when needed. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 28 people with personal care. Not everyone living at Badminton Gardens required assistance with personal care, some had support with domestic duties such as cleaning and shopping. This did not fall within the scope of registration with the Care Quality Commission.
The building was owned by a social landlord and the care and support was provided by Housing & Care 21.The accommodation did not fall within the scope of registration with the Care Quality Commission.
The service had a manager who had been in post since the end of July 2016. They had submitted an application to be registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.
Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and knew what to do if they were concerned about the welfare of people or an allegation of abuse had been made. Any safeguarding concerns were investigated with the outcomes fed back and practices changed if necessary in order to prevent reoccurrences. People had risk assessments to keep them safe whilst receiving personal care. This included environmental risk assessments. People told us they felt safe whilst being supported by staff.
Medicines were managed safely with people receiving their medicines appropriately. All records were complete and up to date with regular medicine audits being carried out. Where errors had taken place, appropriate action had been taken to protect people, including additional training and observations of staff practice.
Staff were recruited in a safe and consistent manner. There was sufficient staff to meet people’s individual needs. People told us staff turned up on time and stayed for the full duration of the visit.
People told us they would like to know the name of the staff in advance. The manager was going to explore how this could be done with the provider.
People had access to a range of health professionals when required. Some people looked after their own health care appointments. People’s nutritional needs were being met and where there were risks additional monitoring was in place which included liaising with the person’s GP and family.
People had their needs assessed and clear plans of care were in place about how the person wanted to be supported. Care plans were personalised and up to date. These had been kept under review. People were very much involved in their care. There was an emphasis on encouraging people to be independent as possible enabling them to live independently in their own flats.
Staff were caring and supportive and demonstrated a good understanding of their roles in supporting people. Staff received training and support that was relevant to their roles and the people they supported. Systems were in place to ensure open communication including team meetings and one to one meetings with their manager. Staff were committed to providing a service that was tailored to each person they supported. People were complimentary about the staff.
People told us they knew how to make a complaint and would feel comfortable in doing so. They confirmed they had no complaints about the care they received.
People were provided with a safe, effective, caring and responsive service that was well led. The registered provider was aware of the importance of reviewing the quality of the service and was aware of the improvements that were needed to enhance the service. This included seeking the views of the people they supported.