Background to this inspection
Updated
22 January 2019
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 registered persons continued to meet 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.
We used information the registered persons sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require registered persons to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the previous inspection report and examined other information we held about the service. This included notifications of incidents that the registered persons had sent us since our last inspection. These are events that happened in the service that the registered persons are required to tell us about. We also invited feedback from the commissioning bodies who contributed to purchasing some of the care provided by the service. We did this so that they could tell us their views about how well the service was meeting people's needs.
We visited the service on 08 January 2019. The inspection consisted of one inspector and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure the manager, staff and people we needed to speak to were available.
We spoke with one person who lived in the service and one relative. We also spoke with the registered manager, the area manager and three care staff. We looked at the care records of three people living at the service. We looked at two staff files as well as records relating to how the service was run. These included the those relating to the management of medicines, health and safety, training records and systems and processes used to monitor and evaluate the service.
We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of two people who had a learning disability and who could not speak with us.
Updated
22 January 2019
This comprehensive inspection was carried out on 08 January 2019 and was announced.
Smock Acre is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Smock Acre is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for a maximum of three people. The home specialises in providing care to people with learning disabilities and has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. At the time of our inspection there were three people living in the service. The service was arranged over one floor.
The service had a registered manager in post. 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.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
Processes were in place to keep people safe from different types of abuse. When risks to people or the environment were identified, action was taken to minimise them. There were enough staff to meet people's needs and staff were recruited safely. People were supported with their medicines in a safe way. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Lessons were learned when things went wrong.
People’s needs were assessed and care and support was delivered in line with current legislation and best practice guidelines. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to meet people’s needs. People were supported to lead healthier lives and had timely access to healthcare services. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. People were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care and support. People’s relatives were also involved in decision making. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. People’s dignity and privacy was respected. People’s personal information was kept private.
People received person-centred care that was responsive to their needs. People knew how to complain and complaints were responded to in line with the service’s policies and procedures. Staff knew how to identify people who might be coming to the end of their life.
Staff said the service was open, transparent and that they felt supported by their managers. There were audits in place which checked the quality of the service being provided. Staff were involved in developing the service. The registered manager had developed links with the local community.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.