Archived: Faith Global Links Ventures Limited

Faith Global Links Ventures Limited is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 5 people. The service provides support to people living with mental health support needs. At the time of our inspection there were 4 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risks to people’s safety were not assessed and managed. Environmental risks were not monitored, and people did not have detailed, personalised risk assessments in place. The service was poorly maintained. The provider’s infection control and cleaning processes were not robust. People’s medicines were not safely managed. Staff had not always received all relevant training for their roles and recruitment checks had not always been completed accurately.

The provider’s safeguarding processes were not effective. People did not receive person-centred care. People’s care plans were not personalised and the provider was not able to demonstrate how they had adapted the service to meet people’s individual needs and preferences. People were not encouraged to eat a healthy and varied diet or engage in meaningful activities which reflected their individual preferences. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.

The provider’s processes for monitoring the safety and quality of the service were not effective and had failed to identify the significant concerns found during the inspection. The culture of the service did not empower people to achieve good outcomes. The provider was not able to demonstrate continuous learning in order to drive improvements in the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 06 October 2017).

Why we inspected

We received concerns in relation to staff training, medicines management, food preparation, infection control and management oversight at the service. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe, effective, responsive, and well-led.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the safe, effective, responsive, and well-led sections of this full report.

The overall rating for the service has changed from good to inadequate based on the findings of this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Faith Global Links Ventures Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified breaches in relation to safe care and treatment, person-centred care, safeguarding, nutritional support, recruitment, and governance at this inspection.

We have made recommendations about the provider's processes for supporting staff and documenting people's decision-making support.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Full information about CQC’s regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.

If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe and there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions the registration.

For adult social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it, and it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.

We found the following examples of good practice.

The premises were clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place, including for touch points.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and appropriate handwashing and sanitising facilities were available to staff.

The staff and residents were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing and had been given the COVID-19 vaccine.

The local authority has provided training on the wearing of PPE and pictorial guidance is displayed.

People were supported to stay in touch with their families through visits that met current government guidelines.

The registered manager needed to carry out a risk assessment with staff, to look at the impact of COVID-19 with staff who may be disproportionality at risk. We have made a recommendation about assessing staff risks.

The registered manager needed to put plans in place which considered the most effective way to cohort staff and zone the service effectively if there was an infection or an outbreak. We have made a recommendation about cohorting and zoning.

When we last visited the service it was rated good.

At this inspection we found the service remained good.

The manager was a strong leader and promoted a calm atmosphere which benefitted people to feel secure and settled. People were encouraged to be involved in the day-to-day decisions at the service. There were systems in place to check the quality of the service and make improvements, where necessary.

The manager had not always sent in notifications to the Commission as required. We therefore made a recommendation that they review their processes in relation to the submission of statutory notifications.

People were supported to stay safe and to manage risk effectively. There were sufficient, safely recruited staff to meet people’s needs. There were robust processes in place to ensure people took their medicines as prescribed.

Staff had the necessary skills to meet a range of complex needs. They worked well with health and social care professionals to promote people’s wellbeing. People choose what they ate and drank in line with their preferences.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how a provider applies the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS are in place to protect people where they do not have capacity to make decisions and where it is considered necessary to restrict their freedom in some way. The registered manager understood their responsibilities in this area. Staff enabled people to be involved in the decisions they made about their life and support.

Staff spoke to people gently and treated them with respect. People were supported to communicate their wishes and preferences and to remain as independent as possible.

Detailed assessments of need were carried out and personalised care plans were in place which provided comprehensive guidance on peoples’ needs. People were supported to develop person-centred routines in line with their preferences. There were varying opportunities to provide feedback about the service and to raise concerns and complaints.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Systems were in place for people to be involved in decisions about their life and consent to their care, treatment and support. Medication was stored securely and administered safely for the protection of people who used the service. Staffing levels were maintained to ensure that sufficient staff were employed to care for people adequately. Any complaints or comments about the service were dealt with appropriately.

People's care and support and personal information about their health, mental health and social care needs was recorded, reviewed and maintained. It was written in a person centred way which ensured that staff provided an individualised service. One person said "I was very angry when I came here but they have helped me. I like this little place".