Archived: The Spinney

Updated 1 December 2018

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.

Our inspection activity started on 7 August 2018 and ended on 19 September 2018. The inspection included two visits to the provider’s office, which we announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the first visit to the office because we needed to be sure that someone was available. The first visit was on 7 August 2018. One inspector and an expert-by-experience carried out this visit. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. This expert-by-experience had experience of caring for someone who used a wide range of health and social care services. Our second visit was on 18 September 2018 and the inspector carried this out. On 19 September 2018 the provider sent us some information we had requested.

Before the first visit we looked at information we held about the service and used this information as part of our inspection planning. The information included notifications. Notifications are information on important events that happen in the service that the provider is required to notify us about. On 11 June 2018 the provider had sent us a completed provider information return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spoke with eight people who were receiving the service and five relatives who were visiting. We spoke with the care team leader, eight care workers, the hairdresser, the area manager and the registered manager. We looked at three people’s care records as well as other records relating to the management of the service. These included medicine administration charts, audit records, and the complaints folder.

Updated 1 December 2018

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

People using the service, The Spinney, live in one building, called The Spinney. There are 52 one or two-bedroom flats each with their own front door onto shared corridors, spread over three floors. There are other shared facilities such as lounges, assisted bathrooms, a hairdressing salon and a dining room where the housing provider offers people a cooked lunch. The domiciliary care agency that we were inspecting (The Spinney) has an office on the ground floor.

Not everyone living at The Spinney receives a service from the agency. CQC only inspects the service, which people provided with the regulated activity ‘personal care’ receive; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where people do receive personal care we also take into account any wider social care provided. Thirty-nine people were receiving personal care at the time of the inspection.

The inspection visits to the service’s office took place on 7 August 2018 and 18 September 2018. Both visits were announced. For the first visit we gave the service 24 hours’ notice as we needed to be sure that there would be someone in the office. The delay in carrying out the second visit was due to the availability of the inspector.

There was 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 they run the service.

At our inspection in August 2017, we rated The Spinney Requires Improvement in two key questions, safe and well-led, and Requires Improvement overall.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions safe and well-led to at least good. At this inspection we found that the provider had made improvements to keep people safe and to report issues appropriately. However, although the provider had reported events to the local safeguarding team and had investigated those events appropriately, they had not always sent the relevant notification to the CQC. The law requires providers to notify CQC of notable events that happen in the service and this had not always happened.

People felt safe and were protected as far as possible by staff who were trained to report any avoidable harm or abuse. Staff had assessed any potential risks to people and had put measures in place to reduce the risk. There were enough staff to meet people’s assessed needs in a timely manner and keep people safe. The provider’s recruitment process reduced the risk of them employing unsuitable staff.

Staff followed the correct procedures to prevent the spread of infection and knew how to report any accidents and incidents. Staff had undertaken training in how to give medicines safely and as they were prescribed.

Senior staff carried out assessments of people’s needs to ensure that staff were able to meet those needs in the way the person preferred. The provider used technology, such as an alarm call system, to enhance the care provided by the staff.

New staff received a thorough induction during which they shadowed more experienced staff. Staff received training, supervision and support so that they could do their job as well as possible. Staff helped people to make their own breakfast and evening meal, if the person needed help. The housing provider supplied a three-course lunch in the dining room, which staff from the agency served. Staff involved other healthcare professionals to support people to maintain their health.

Staff supported people to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People and their relatives made positive comments about the staff. Staff treated people kindly and showed they knew each person well. People were involved in planning their care and support. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and supported people to remain as independent as possible.

Care plans gave staff detailed guidance relating to the care and support each person needed so that people received personalised care that was responsive to their individual needs.

A complaints process was in place and the registered manager responded in a timely manner to all complaints. The provider had a process in place to meet people’s end-of-life care needs when the person needed this.

Staff felt supported by the registered manager and the care team leader. Staff were clear about their role to provide people with a high-quality service, thus upholding the provider’s values. Staff liked working for this service.

The provider had a quality assurance system in place. The system included a number of ways in which people, their relatives and staff could give their views about the service and how the provider could improve it. Various members of staff carried out audits and monitoring checks on aspects of the service.

The registered manager worked in partnership with other professionals to give people joined-up care.