Archived: Imber House

Updated 23 March 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 11 December 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

The provider completed a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give key information about the service, for example, what the service does well and any improvements they intend to make. Before the inspection we examined previous inspection records and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.

People using the service were not always able to communicate their views on their care to us. We spoke to people's relatives and health professionals involved in their care as well as carrying out observations to assess their experiences. We spoke with two people who used the service, two members of staff and the provider. We also spoke to the relatives for three people and healthcare professionals involved in the care of four people using the service. We looked at the care records for five people, including their care plans and risk assessments. We looked at two staff recruitment files, medicine records, minutes of meetings and documents relating to the quality monitoring of the service.

Updated 23 March 2016

Imber House is a care home providing care and support to a maximum of five people living with a learning disability. At the time of our visit there were five people using the service.

The inspection was unannounced and took place on 11 December 2015.

The service is not required to have a registered manager, as the provider is in day to day running of the service. 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 requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about the service is run.

People told us they felt safe living in the service, People's relatives and health professionals involved in their care felt the service was safe. There were clear plans in place to reduce the risks of people coming to harm. Staff and the provider understood their role in supporting people to keep safe.

People’s relatives told us, and our observations confirmed that there were enough suitably qualified, trained and supported staff to meet people’s needs. Staff told us they received the training they needed to carry out their role effectively, and that they were supported to do their job.

There was a robust recruitment procedure in place to ensure that prospective staff members had the skills, qualifications and background to support people.

Medicines were stored and administered safely. The provider was able to identify errors in medicine administration, but improvements are required to ensure that the provider is able to evidence this with records.

The service had not made the appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards referrals for people using the service following changes in legislation. However, people using the service were supported to live their lives in the way they wished and make important decisions independently.

People were supported to live full and active lives, and engage in meaningful activity within the service and out in the community.

People and their representatives were aware of the support they should receive from staff. However, improvements were required with regard to how people are involved in the planning of their support in the future, and how their views are reflected in their care records.

Improvements are required to ensure that the provider can evidence that there is a robust quality assurance system in place capable of identifying shortfalls.

There was an open culture at the service. People's representatives said they felt able to make suggestions and give feedback. However, improvements were required in order to put in place a formal system for obtaining the views of people using the service, relatives and other relevant persons such as healthcare professionals. Staff told us they felt confident in raising concerns or making suggestions to their manager.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to complain if they were unhappy.