Archived: Foulden Road

We visited Foulden Road on 2 March 2016 to undertake an inspection of the service. The inspection was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors.

We checked information that the Care Quality Commission (CQC) held about the service which included a Provider Information Return (PIR), previous inspection reports and notifications sent to CQC by the provider before the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, including what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. The notifications provide us with information about changes to the service and any significant concerns reported by the provider.

We spoke with four people, one relative and a health and social care professional who was visiting on the day of our inspection. We spent time observing the care people received and listened to a staff handover. We contacted the community mental health team (CMHT) and spoke to two health and social care professionals to gather information regarding the service.

We looked at the records in relation to four people’s care including their medicines records. We also spoke with one care worker, two personal support assistants, the chef, cleaner and the registered manager. We looked at records relating to the management of the service, staff training records, and a selection of the provider’s policies and procedures.

Is the service safe?

Care plans and risk assessments gave information for staff about the needs of people who use the service and how to support them. Staff took into account identified risks to ensure the safety and welfare of people. People told us they felt safe in the home and could talk to staff if they had concerns. Staff had received training and were knowledgeable about safeguarding procedures if they suspected or witnessed abuse.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. We found that the service was compliant in seeking consent from people who used the service.

Is the service effective?

Care workers were knowledgeable about how to meet individual people's needs. People were overall stable in their placement and progressing well with their individual plans and goals. Individual needs were assessed and plans reviewed to ensure the service met people’s ongoing needs. People's mental and physical healthcare needs were monitored and met by health care professionals as needed. The provider had systems in place to check the quality and effectiveness of the service. Records were kept securely.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service said they liked living in the home and were supported by caring and helpful staff. Staff encouraged people to remain independent and gave support where needed. People's diversity, values and human rights were respected.

Is the service responsive?

Staff members showed awareness of people's mental and physical health conditions and possible warning signs and symptoms. People's mental and physical healthcare needs were monitored and met by health care professionals as they needed.

Is the service well led?

The provider had auditing systems in place to regularly monitor the quality of service to ensure it met the service objectives. Staff received regular supervision, training and annual appraisals of their performance so that they were well supported and knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities.

People received individual care and support that met their needs and protected their rights. The home worked with health and social care professionals for the benefit of people living at the home. People lived in an environment that was safe and suitable for their needs. People were made aware of how to complain and said they were satisfied with the service. The service had received few complaints but had handled them according to their complaints procedure.

People using the service with were pleased with their care. One person said, "I am happy with the home itself" and another said, "I enjoy myself." People said they had enough to do, they had support from staff when they needed it, and they liked the environment. The service organised a range of social activities for people and supported individuals with day to day tasks like cooking. People's views about the food were more mixed.

We found that the staff checked that people consented to care. The service assessed people's individual needs and preferences to ensure that people's care was appropriate. Medicines were being managed safely but the medication records for one person did not accurately record the time they took their medicines. The manager told us they would address this issue.

People using the service and staff members told us there were sufficient members of staff on duty at the home. We observed that staff did not seem rushed and were able to engage people in a relaxed and sensitive way. The provider was monitoring the quality of care at Foulden Road in a number of ways and engaged people using the service in improving the service.