Archived: Sutton Lodge Home Support

Updated 3 September 2015

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.

This inspection took place on 29 April 2015 and was announced.

The provider was given 48 hours notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection team was made up of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using services or caring for someone who requires this type of service, such as older people. The expert by experience spoke with people and their relatives by phone.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. They did not return a PIR and we took this into account when we made the judgements in this report.

Before the inspection we looked at previous inspection reports and we reviewed other information that we held about the service such as notifications, which are events which happened in the service that the provider is required to tell us about, and information that had been sent to us by other agencies. We used this information to help plan our inspection.

We looked at a range of records related to the running of and the quality of the service. This included staff training information and staff meeting minutes.

We also looked at the quality assurance audits that the registered provider completed which monitored and assessed the quality of the service provided.

During our inspection we spoke with the registered provider, a personal assistant, a team leader and six care staff. We also spoke with four people who received care from the service and five relatives.

We looked at the care plans or daily care records for 11 people. A care plan provides staff with detailed information and guidance on how to meet a person's assessed social and health care needs.

We asked the local authority and commissioners of healthcare services for information in order to get their view on the quality of care provided by the service.

Updated 3 September 2015

The inspection took place on 29 April 2015 and was announced.

The provider was given 48 hours notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to be sure that someone would be in.

Sutton Lodge Home Support is a community based adult social care support service registered to provide personal care to people living in their own home. There were 32 care staff employed to deliver care to 74 people.

The service was managed by the registered provider. Registered providers are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how a provider applies the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 and to report on what we find.People who lacked capacity to make a decision were supported by staff who acted in their best interests.

Staff understood safeguarding issues and knew how to recognise and report any concerns in order to keep people safe from harm. However, the registered provider did not always undertake safe staff recruitment checks before staff were appointed to their role. People felt supported to take their medicines safely by staff who were competent to monitor them.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to undertake training to improve their knowledge and skills to perform their roles and responsibilities. People had their healthcare needs identified and were able to access health and social care professionals such as their GP and social worker. Staff knew how to access specialist professional help when needed.

People and their relatives told us that staff were kind and caring and people were treated with dignity by staff who respected their choices, needs and preferences. Staff respected a person’s home, their personal belongings and their lifestyle choices.

People were supported to maintain their independence and maintain their everyday activities and past times. The registered provider had systems in place to prevent people from feeling isolated in their own home.

The registered provider had an open door policy and people, their relatives and staff said that they found them approachable. People were able to give their feedback on the service. However, the registered provider’s quality monitoring systems did not always pick up shortfalls in the service.