All inspections: Coleman Street - Care Quality Commission

This inspection took place on 8 September 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in November 2013 the provider was meeting all of the regulations that we looked at.

The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to eight people with a learning disability within the residential home, and personal care to a further six people living in the adjoining properties. At the time of our visit there were fourteen people living at the service.

The home has 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 kept safe and protected from harm by staff who had a good understanding of safeguarding and different types of abuse. People were supported by staff who knew them well and had detailed support plans which reflected their preferences. People had detailed risk assessments that gave guidance to staff about the risk involved in their care and how to keep them safe. We saw that people received their medicines safely and in a timely manner. People’s medicines were managed safely and there was a clear auditing process in place so that medicines were checked and accounted for.

People were supported by staff who were well trained and supported by both the registered manager and the provider. Staff asked people for consent before carrying out care and the support provided respected people’s rights and freedom. People were supported to make decisions about what to eat and drink and there was a varied menu that reflected people’s choices. People were encouraged to shop for food as well and help prepare it where possible.

People were cared for by staff who were sensitive in their approach and who cared about their wellbeing. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible and were warm and friendly towards people. People were encouraged to express their views through group and one to one meetings. Staff respected people’s privacy and personal space.

People were encouraged to follow their interests and were supported to develop hobbies and take part in activities that they found enjoyable. Staff had a good knowledge of people’s care plans which reflected their individual support needs. People and their relatives were involved in care planning and were encouraged to give feedback, both positive and negative, to staff and the registered manager.

There were systems in place to monitor quality and the provider carried out regular audits to ensure that people were safe and received the care that they needed. People and their relatives were encouraged to given feedback about the service and any complaints, concerns or suggestions were acted upon in a timely manner. The manager was visible and operated an ‘open door’ policy giving people, relatives and staff opportunities to speak with them.

On the day of our inspection there were eight people living at Cranmer. We spoke with four members of staff, four people who used the service and four relatives. We looked at policies and processes, four care records and four staff records to gain an insight into the care provided.

We saw that people and their relatives were involved in decisions about the care provided and details of their needs and interests were included in their care records.

Care plans and risk assessments were in place and were updated regularly to ensure people received the care they needed. There were a variety of activities designed to meet people's needs and maintain their independence. People told us they liked living at Cranmer. One person told us, 'I like it here, especially darts and music.'

We saw that the home was clean and tidy. There was a rota for cleaning and people who used the service were able to help if they wished. Staff received appropriate training and showed a good knowledge of how they would prevent infection spreading if people became unwell.

One relative told us, 'The staff are brilliant.' Another relative told us, 'I have nothing but praise for the staff they treat everyone like family.' Staff we spoke with said they loved working at Cranmer and that they were supported with relevant training to care for the people who used the service.

People experienced good quality care and effective systems for monitoring were in place. There was evidence that people and their relatives knew how to complain if things were not right.

We spoke with three people who lived at the home, three staff, and the registered manager.

We spoke with three people about their life at the home. They told us about the support they received that reflected their care records. People told us,' Staff look after us well' and, 'Any problem staff will sort out'. We observed staff give positive reinforcement to people when they were carrying out tasks. During observation we saw positive relationships between people and the staff.

People had regular contact with health professionals. This was documented in records and confirmed by people we spoke with. We saw people had health plans that clearly set out how their health was to be promoted.

We spoke with people about foods they liked and these reflected what we saw recorded in their records. People told us they were able to make choices as to what food they had. This meant that people had involvement in their food choices.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because arrangements were in place to protect people from harm.

Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to the management of or the support provided to people to allow safe administration of their medication

People who used the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on.

Archived: Coleman Street

All Inspections

8 September 2015

During a routine inspection

18 November 2013

During a routine inspection

11 December 2012

During a routine inspection