29 June 2017
During a routine inspection
There was a manager at the service who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC.) A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
This is the first inspection of Carrbridge House. The service was registered with CQC in September 2016.
This inspection took place on 29 June and 5 July 2017 and was announced. The registered provider was given 48 hours’ notice of our inspection because the location is a small care home used for respite care and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.
On the day of our inspection there was one person using Carrbridge House.
At this inspection we found that people who used the service were safe. Staff knew how to identify if a person may be at risk of harm and the action to take if they had any concerns.
Recruitment processes were not always safe as not all information in regard to staff’s suitability to work with vulnerable adults was available as required by the regulations.
Training for staff could be improved as not all training was accredited and some required updating to ensure staff were up to date with current practice. Competency of some elements of staff roles required implementing. Supervision was provided and staff felt supported, but this had not taken place at the frequency identified in the registered provider’s policies and procedures. Not all staff had received appraisals annually, in accordance with the registered provider’s policies and procedures.
Risk assessments were in place to minimise risks presented by people and the environment, such as fire safety.
Systems for managing medicines were safe.
People were supported to have choice and control of their lives, but there were restrictions in place where there was no supporting documentation to confirm the legal authority of those restrictions.
Staff knew the people they were supporting very well and their preferred ways to be supported.
People participated in a range of daily activities both in and outside of the home, although some advocates and staff felt this required expanding to better meet people’s needs and promote their independence.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided, however, the checks and audits in place had not identified shortfalls found during the inspection.
People and their relatives had been asked their opinion of the quality of the service.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.