Archived: Ansar 5

Ansar 5 is a bungalow on a main road on the outskirts of Radcliffe. The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for one person with learning disabilities.

The service had a registered manager who was present on the day of the inspection. 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.

Policies and procedures were in place to safeguard people from abuse and staff had received training in safeguarding adults. Staff were able to tell us how to identify and respond to allegations of abuse. They were also aware of the responsibility to ‘whistle blow’ on colleagues who they thought might be delivering poor practice to people.

A safe system of recruitment was in place, which helped protect the person from the risk of unsuitable staff. We found that a small team of staff, who the person liked and who knew the person well, worked at the home. Staff were based at the service because they enjoyed the same things the person who lived there did. There were sufficient staff at all times to ensure the person had the support they required.

Person centred risk assessments were in place that supported staff to manage risk in a positive way. They also gave staff guidance on how to reduce the risk of social isolation and promote the person’s independence. There was a safe system in place for managing the person’s medicines.

We looked around the home and found it to be homely, spacious, bright, clean and well decorated. It was a bungalow; the single storey reduced the risks of the person falling downstairs when they were unsteady on their feet. There was a secure level access garden that the person enjoyed using.

Systems were in place for dealing with emergencies that could affect the provision of care such as failure of gas and electric supply. The person’s rights and choices were respected and staff supported the person in a way that encouraged them to make choices. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

Staff had received the induction, training and supervision they required to ensure they had the skills and knowledge needed to carry out their roles effectively.

The registered manager and staff we spoke with demonstrated a commitment to person centred care and to continually reviewing, the service to ensure it was meeting the person’s needs. They used a variety of ways of involving the person in developing the service and of finding out what they wanted from the service. They knew the person very well.

The service had detailed guidance for staff on how to support the person when they showed behaviour that challenged the service. This included understanding how the person communicated and guided staff on how to respond. A communication book was used to identify what the person meant when using signs and gestures. We saw that the service had a positive, responsive and respectful approach to the way they supported the person.

The relative we spoke with felt the staff and managers were caring. They told us staff understood the person who used the service and that the person had become, “Much more relaxed” whilst living at the home.

During our inspection, we asked the person who used the service about living at the home and activities they did. They indicated by smiling and with some words and gestures that they were happy living at the home and enjoyed the activities they did.

We spent time observing how the person who used the service interacted with staff. We saw they were relaxed and comfortable in expressing their wishes and choices to staff. We saw that staff responded immediately in a respectful and gentle manner. We saw that the person looked to staff for reassurance; which they gave in a caring way.

Care records were detailed; person centred and described the person in positively. They contained detailed information about the person and what staff needed to do to support them. This included a person centred plan that had information about people, places and things that the person liked and things the person didn’t like. It also showed their “gifts and talents” and their dreams and wishes for the future. This contained pictures and graphics to help the person understand what it was about.

There was a wide range of activities the person did throughout the week both inside the home and in community settings. These were based on the person’s interests and hobbies. We found the person had routines that were very important to them. We saw that staff and the registered manager recognised and respected the person’s routines.

We found there was a system in place for quality assurance. Weekly and monthly checks and audits were used to assess, monitor and review the service. Relatives felt listened to and were involved in improving the service.

People spoke very positively about the registered manager and other managers within the service and of their caring and person centred approach. Staff told us they enjoyed working for the service and felt very supported in their roles.