Archived: 82 Canadian Avenue

Updated 22 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. However, we were not able to rate the service as there was only one person using the service at the time of the inspection.

This announced inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector on 31 October and 9 November 2018. We gave two days’ notice to the provider as we needed to make sure that key staff were available and provide sufficient time for the registered manager to consult with the person who used the service in relation to when they wished to speak with us.

This was the first inspection of the service since it registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 November 2017. Prior to this inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included any notifications sent to us by the registered manager about significant incidents and events that had occurred at the service, which the provider is required to send to us by law. We also reviewed the 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 the improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with one person who used the service, one support worker and one senior support worker, an administrator and the registered manager. The service is located close to a 24-bedded mental health hospital, which is owned and managed by the provider. We met the hospital director, who is the line manager and clinical supervisor for the registered manager at 82 Canadian Avenue, and were also joined by the provider’s regional manager on the first day of the inspection.

We read the care and support plan of the person using the service, and the accompanying risk assessments. We also looked at a variety of documents including health and safety records, staff recruitment, training, supervision and appraisal records, medicine administration record (MAR) sheets and a range of policies and procedures. The registered manager gave us a tour of the premises on the first day of the inspection and the person who used the service invited us to look at their room on the second day.

Following the inspection visit, we spoke with two relatives of the person who used the service. We also received written comments from a local health and social care professional with knowledge of how the provider had supported the person who used the service.

Updated 22 December 2018

This announced inspection took place on 31 October and 9 November 2018. We gave 48 hours’ notice of our intention to conduct this inspection as it is a small service and we had been previously informed by the registered manager that the person who used the service wished to share their views with us about the quality of care and support they received. The service is registered to accommodate six people with mental health care needs and at the time of the inspection there was only one person living at the service.

82 Canadian Avenue is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. This was the first inspection of this service since its registration with CQC on 8 November 2017.

There was a registered manager in post, who was present on both days of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of harm and neglect. Risk assessments were in place to identify and mitigate risks, to support the person who used the service to be as independent as possible while maintaining their safety. Systems had been developed to safely administer prescribed medicines, and the robust use of infection control procedures protected people from the risk of cross infection. The premises were well maintained although we noted that the current design of the ground floor office could be reviewed with people who used the service and their representatives, to ensure that it meets their wishes for a relaxed and homely environment. Sufficient staff were deployed and were recruited in a rigorous manner that ensured employees were suitable to work at the service.

Staff understood the needs of the person who used the service and supported the person to meet their health care and nutritional needs. The service supported the person to access community resources and maintain important relationships and friendships. The provider made sure that people’s needs were assessed before they moved into the service, so that the provider could ensure the service was suitable for them. The person’s care plan was kept under review and the objectives were discussed with the person during care planning review meetings.

The provider ensured staff received the training and support they needed to carry out their roles and responsibilities. Staff expressed that they felt well supported by the registered manager and felt the training was of a good standard.

The person who used the service was supported to make their own choices where possible and was provided with their care and support in a respectful way that upheld their entitlement to dignity. Staff understood the importance of seeking people’s consent before they provided personal care and other support. Systems were in place to ensure people knew how to make a complaint and they were supported to access independent advocacy if they wished to.

The registered manager was knowledgeable about the needs of people with mental health care needs, learning disabilities and autism, due to her nursing background and subsequent experience of working in different settings. She carried out regular checks to ensure that people were provided with a safe environment, and make sure staff adhered to the provider’s policies and procedures. Monitoring visits were undertaken by the provider’s quality assurance team to identify any improvements that could be made. The registered manager was supported by her line manager, who worked at an adjacent service operated by the provider.

We have not rated the service as there was only one person living at the service at the time of the inspection.