Archived: Blackberry Court

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

When we arrived at the service a member of staff greeted us, noted our identification and asked us to sign in the visitor's book. This meant that the appropriate actions were taken to ensure that the people who used the service were protected from others who did not have the right to access their home.

We saw the staff rota which showed that the service assessed people's needs to ensure that there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs.

We reviewed staffing records regarding The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 in relation to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and saw this training was up to date. The CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. The registered manager and staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

There were systems in place to audit medication and care plans which ensured there were effective systems in place for the delivery of care.

People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. We saw that staff had signed records to show they had been reviewed monthly and updated appropriately. This meant that staff were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.

Is the service caring?

We saw that the staff interacted with people who lived in the service in a caring, respectful and professional manner. We saw that the staff conversed with a person who used the service both verbally and using sign language to determine if they wanted a drink.

Is the service responsive?

The service had an effective complaints procedure in place which included a pictorial system to support people. We examined the care records of two people who used the service and noted that risk assessments were reviewed and updated in response to events. This ensured people received safe and appropriate care.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

The service had a quality assurance system in place and robust recruitment arrangements.

We observed that the staff interacted with people in a friendly, respectful and professional manner and were attentive to people's needs. We saw that staff sought people's agreement before providing any support or assistance.

We saw that appropriate repair and maintenance schedules were in place to ensure that the building and equipment remained fit for purpose. We saw that staff had received COSHH (Control of Substances Hazardous to Health) training to ensure the safe storage and use of dangerous household chemicals, although we found that some were not appropriately stored. We found that, whilst the service stated that water temperatures were regularly tested, the water in someone's bath was running at a scalding temperature.

People were supported by staff to safely store and administer the medication they required.

Care plans were being updated to make them more person centred and risk assessments were in place to protect people. There was scope to update the information available to staff around the treatment of one person's medical condition.

We saw that appropriate measures were taken to ensure that the people living in the service, their visitors and the staff were protected against the spread of health care associated infections.

People were encouraged and supported to make complaints. We saw that complaints that had been received were dealt with in line with the provider's complaints procedure. Staff on duty told us that they tried to ensure that complaints were dealt with informally.