We carried out a review of the data available to us about Meadows on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Meadows, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People at the service achieved good outcomes and had good relationships with the staff who supported them.
The registered manager had left in 2018 and the service was being run by two directors. Shortly after our inspection one of the directors applied to become registered manager. This had been an unsettled period at the service, however we found the provider was focused on making things better for people by improving communication and the management culture. A committed and settled staff team had helped to ensure impact on people from the changes at the service was minimised.
Since our last inspection, concerns had been raised that people living at the service were at risk of financial abuse. The provider had acted swiftly and effectively in response; however, we were concerned measures had not been in place to pick up the risk to people in a timely manner. Audits and checks had now improved and the provider had better oversight of what was going on at the service.
Staff were committed and diligent about supporting people safely and knew what to do if they were concerned a person was at risk. The recent changes at the service, such as the new audits, were helping to improve systems which kept people safe. There were effective systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.
The property was well maintained with systems in place to reduce the risk of infection. Specialist adaptations and equipment supported people who were deaf or hearing impaired.
There were enough safely recruited staff at the service. Staff were well supported and trained. The provider promoted an inclusive staffing team where individual staff members diverse needs were respected.
Staff worked well with external professionals to promote peoples’ health and wellbeing. People made choices about what they ate and drank and received the necessary support to manage any
specialist nutritional needs.
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.
Staff communicated effectively with people, using a variety of communication methods, including BSL. They knew people well and provided care in a person-centred, flexible manner. Staff had sensitively considered people’s needs should they require end of life care.
There were systems in place to support people to complain. The provider had increased their visibility to give people, families and staff more opportunities to raise concerns.
Rating at last inspection:
Good. The last report was published on 26 October 2015.
Why we inspected:
This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor this service to ensure people receive care which meets their needs.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection took place on the 8 September 2015. The service received 24 hours’ notice of the inspection.
The service provides care and support for up to seven people who have a learning disability and may have a hearing impairment. At the time of our inspection there were seven people using the service.
The service had a registered manager. 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.
People were safe because staff understood their roles and responsibility in managing risk, identifying and reporting abuse appropriately. People’s care and support needs were identified and they received safe care that met their needs.
There were sufficient staff who had been recruited safely and who had the skills and knowledge to provide care and support to people in the way they preferred. Staff received training to ensure they could meet people’s needs, this included training relevant to the needs of people living in the service such as British Sign Language. The service employed staff with specific insight into the needs of people living in the service.
The provider understood their responsibilities to provide a safe environment that met people’s individual needs. Improvements were being made to the building to provide people with an environment which was up to date and met their needs.
People were treated with kindness and respect by staff who knew them well. They were supported to take part in activities both inside and outside the service. Where people were unable to communicate verbally recognised methods of communication were used. Staff had also developed ways of communicating with individuals who were unable to use these techniques.
There was an open culture and the management team demonstrated good leadership skills. Staff morale was high; they were enthusiastic about their roles and felt supported and valued by the management team.
There were systems in place to check and audit the quality of the service. These processes were used to make improvements and develop the service.