This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 06 January 2016. Our last inspection took place on 24 July 2013 and we found the provider met the regulations we looked at.
United Response - 2a St Alban Close provides care and support for up to four people with learning disabilities. Local shops and community facilities are a short walk away in the Harehills area of Leeds.
At the time of our inspection the service did not have a registered manager. 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 legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. We found there was a manager in post who was intending to register with the CQC.
Relatives felt their family members were safe and staff knew how to identify different types of abuse as well as who to report concerns to. Where action had been identified in response to a safeguarding incident we saw this had taken place. We found risk assessments in place in care plans, but saw these were not regularly reviewed and some required more detail. There was a risk to people’s safety because medicines were not always managed consistently and safely. We saw fire safety was well managed.
Mental capacity assessments had been completed as part of the application for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), but these assessments were not decision specific. People’s care plans contained sufficient and relevant information to provide consistent care and support.
We found there were insufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff consistently on shift. We saw recruitment was generally well managed, but found the manager had started working unsupervised before the provider had received a response from the Disclosure Barring Service (DBS) regarding their suitability to working with vulnerable adults.
Staff were suitably qualified and competent in their roles and relatives confirmed this. Staff received an appropriate induction and a range of further training. Some gaps existed in staff supervision records.
There was opportunity for people to be involved in a range of activities within the home or the local community. People had access to food and drinks. People received good support which ensured their health care needs were met. Staff were aware and knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity, but we witnessed poor practice on the day of our inspection.
The manager was appreciated by staff and they were supported by an area manager who regularly visited the service. People had been given opportunity to comment on the quality of service, but we were unable to see how their feedback affected service delivery. Complaints had been recorded, but the details including the response to these were not available to us during the inspection.
We found breaches of regulations 19, 12, 18 and 10 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 06 January 2016. Our last inspection took place on 24 July 2013 and we found the provider met the regulations we looked at.
United Response - 2a St Alban Close provides care and support for up to four people with learning disabilities. Local shops and community facilities are a short walk away in the Harehills area of Leeds.
At the time of our inspection the service did not have a registered manager. 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 legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. We found there was a manager in post who was intending to register with the CQC.
Relatives felt their family members were safe and staff knew how to identify different types of abuse as well as who to report concerns to. Where action had been identified in response to a safeguarding incident we saw this had taken place. We found risk assessments in place in care plans, but saw these were not regularly reviewed and some required more detail. There was a risk to people’s safety because medicines were not always managed consistently and safely. We saw fire safety was well managed.
Mental capacity assessments had been completed as part of the application for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), but these assessments were not decision specific. People’s care plans contained sufficient and relevant information to provide consistent care and support.
We found there were insufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff consistently on shift. We saw recruitment was generally well managed, but found the manager had started working unsupervised before the provider had received a response from the Disclosure Barring Service (DBS) regarding their suitability to working with vulnerable adults.
Staff were suitably qualified and competent in their roles and relatives confirmed this. Staff received an appropriate induction and a range of further training. Some gaps existed in staff supervision records.
There was opportunity for people to be involved in a range of activities within the home or the local community. People had access to food and drinks. People received good support which ensured their health care needs were met. Staff were aware and knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity, but we witnessed poor practice on the day of our inspection.
The manager was appreciated by staff and they were supported by an area manager who regularly visited the service. People had been given opportunity to comment on the quality of service, but we were unable to see how their feedback affected service delivery. Complaints had been recorded, but the details including the response to these were not available to us during the inspection.
We found breaches of regulations 19, 12, 18 and 10 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.