Background to this inspection
Updated
4 February 2020
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. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type
This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.
Notice of 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.
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity was started and completed on the 10 December 2019. We visited the office location on 10 December 2019.
What we did before the inspection
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with three people who used the service and three relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with three members of staff. We also spoke with the registered manager and duty managers.
We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with two professionals who regularly visit the service.
Updated
4 February 2020
About the service
Corbett House provides personal care to people in an assisted living development within privately owned, self-contained apartments. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People said they felt safe when staff were present. Relatives said their family member was safe at Corbett Court. The staff told us they had attended training in safeguarding of adults at risk. These staff were knowledgeable on the types of abuse and felt confident to report concerns.
Risks were assessed, and the actions depended on the level of risk identified. Staff told us they always assessed risks and were kept informed about changes.
People we spoke with told us they knew the staff that delivered personal care. They said the staff arrived on time and stayed for the agreed times. Records showed the schedule of visits and the care to be delivered.
People and their relatives made arrangements for the ordering and storage of medicines. Where staff administered medicines, the risks were assessed. Staff signed records where they administered medicines. Medicines were audited weekly by the duty manager and copies of the audits were reviewed monthly by the registered manager. We recommended the provider developed individual profiles regarding the person’s preferences on how they took their medicines and the purpose of them.
Staff were supported with the roles they were employed to perform. Staff had attended training set as mandatory by the provider.
People or families organised their healthcare visits. People made separate arrangements for their nutritional requirements. Care plans were developed where staff supported people with their eating and drinking.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People told us the staff were kind and caring. They told us their rights were respected. The staff we spoke with explained their approach and how they built relationships. Relatives told us the staff were exceptionally kind and had shown compassion and complimented the staff for the care delivered to their family member.
People’s needs were assessed including the person’s ability to manage their care needs. The person’s preference on how staff were to deliver their personal care was detailed. People received minimal support from the staff and care plans reflected the support.
Relatives told us they were part of the planning of their family member’s care and were invited to reviews. People or their relatives made separate arrangements with external agencies where more extensive support with personal care was identified.
People knew who to approach with their complaints. There were no complaints received about the service since 2018.
There were a range of audits undertaken. The registered manager was supported by the area manager. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and the team worked well together
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published in May 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.