Background to this inspection
Updated
27 May 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.
We undertook the inspection of this service on 28 April 2016.
The inspection was unannounced and carried out by one inspector.
Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included statutory notifications and a Provider Information Return (PIR). PIR is a form that is completed by the provider to give some key information about the service, including what the service does well and what improvements are required.
During the inspection we talked with two people living at the service, three staff members, the service co-ordinator, the deputy co-ordinator and the registered manager of this service. We reviewed three people’s care records, five staff files, training records, staff rotas and other records relating to the management of the service.
After the inspection we contacted two relatives and three health and social care professionals asking for their views about the services provided for people.
Updated
27 May 2016
L'Arche Lambeth the Sycamore is a residential care home for five adults with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection four people were using the service.
At the last inspection on 29 September 2013 we found that the service had met all standards inspected. This inspection took place on 28 April 2016 and was unannounced.
At the time of inspection a registered manager was in post. The service also had a service co-ordinator and a deputy co-ordinator who managed the day-to-day running of the home. 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.
We found that the staff team had knowledge and skills to support people from harm. Appropriate systems were in place to monitor incidents and accidents, which meant that immediate support was provided for people when needed. The service ensure that a protection plan was in place for people who were at risk to abuse. Staff carried out people’s individual risk assessments to assist them to stay safe from potential harm and injury. There were sufficient number of staff to support people with their care needs. Staff supported people to manage their medicines safely.
Staff were provided with support to identify their professional goals and developmental needs. They received regular supervision to discuss their performance and training needs. However, some staff had not had regular appraisal meetings because the provider had made a decision to undertake everyone’s appraisal in the same month.
Staff attended relevant to their role training courses to ensure that the support provided for people was in line with good practice. The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), which ensured that people received assistance to make decisions. Staff supported people to make choices about what they wanted to eat and drink. People were up-to-date with their routine health appointments and had access to health professionals for support where necessary.
We observed that people had good relationships with staff. Staff were kind to people and respected their privacy. People had support to follow their religious believes and maintain relationships in the community. Staff knew people’s preferences and encouraged them to attend activities of their choice. People’s friends and relatives were able to visit when it suited them best.
Staff supported people to plan their care. The service held regular review meetings to discuss people’s goals and achievements. This meant that people were consulted about what was important for them. People’s families were involved in supporting people to make complex decisions. People and their relatives had regularly provided feedback about the service and felt that the concerns raised were adhered to as appropriate.
Staff told us they were supported by the management team and asked them for advice when needed. Regular staff meetings were carried out, which enabled staff to question practice and make suggestions to improve where required. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care provided for people. The management team and staff had carried out regular audits to identify and make changes were appropriate.