Archived: Millicent Preston House

Updated 24 June 2016

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.

This inspection took place on the 4 and 5 May 2016 and was unannounced on the first day.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an expert by experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This 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 reviewed the information we held about the service and looked at notifications received. We also spoke to the local Healthwatch.

We spoke to seven people using the service and one relative. We also spoke with four members of staff which included the registered manager, the extra care coordinator and the cleaner. We observed care, medicine administration and reviewed the records of three people and three staff files. Policies and procedures were also reviewed during the inspection which included safeguarding, whistleblowing, health and safety, risk assessments and the medicines policy.

Updated 24 June 2016

The inspection took place on the 4 and 5 May 2016 and was unannounced on the first day. The service was last inspected on the 22 September 2014 and was meeting all the legal requirements we looked at.

Millicent Preston House provides extra care housing and has 34 flats. The service provided accommodation and daytime support. Evening support was provided by an external service. People who were assessed as needing support with personal care and/or medicines had staff support.

Each flat had its own bedroom, living room, kitchen and bathroom area. Some people had their own garden on the ground floor. There were communal areas where people could sit and watch television or relax.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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 in the service as the service provided people with a pendent to call staff and they had call bells in their flats. Staff carried a mobile and cordless telephone at all times when on site so they could respond to calls from people in their flat.

Medicines were administered safely and people who took medicines had up to date risk assessments informing staff of possible side effects to be aware of.

Safe recruitment was followed as staff references and a criminal records checks were carried out before employment commenced.

Care was provided by staff who had up to date skills and knowledge and long term experience in giving care. Regular training was provided to staff and they had their medicines competence observed by management as part of supervisions and one to ones.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and the need to assess peoples capacity on a regular basis. People had capacity in the service and nobody was restricted under Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff asked people for consent before giving care and before administering medicines.

People were cared for by kind and compassionate staff who took the time to listen to people and we observe them help people in the service.

Care plans were person centred and provided personal information about people so that staff could get to know the person as an individual. Families were involved in their relatives care and provided information to the service to help ensure care was personalised. Risk assessments with management plans were up to date and reviewed regularly.

People told us they would like to see more activities at the service but these would require personal funding from people. However we did see that the extra care coordinator had worked to bring in different activities to the service such as a library service, fish and chip night, bingo and the local school visits.

Staff and people had regular meetings where they discussed what was happening in the service. Feedback was regularly requested from people at the service, staff and health professionals. The registered manager performed audits of the service to ensure the care provided was of good quality and records we viewed showed that action from audits were completed so that the service improved.