Archived: Ability Housing Prospect Lane

Updated 21 July 2018

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 5 June 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice in advance because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We needed to be sure that members of staff and members of the management would be available in the office to assist us with the inspection.

The inspection site visit activity started on 5 June 2018 and ended on 7 June 2018. It included reviewing records kept in the office and telephone interviews with people using the service. We visited the office location on 5 June 2018 to interview the manager and office staff; and to review care records as well as policies and procedures.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service, including data about safeguarding and statutory notifications. Statutory notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We asked the local authority and other professionals if they had any information to share with us about the services provided. Local authorities are responsible for monitoring the quality and funding for people who use the service.

We spoke with three people and six relatives over a phone and we visited three people at their homes. We spoke to the registered manager, the senior member of staff and one carer. Following our inspection on 7 June 2018 we contacted 16 members of staff

We reviewed care plans for four people, four staff files, training records and records relating to the management of the service such as audits, policies and procedures.

Updated 21 July 2018

This announced inspection took place on 5 June 2018.

At our last inspection in January 2017 we had found the provider had been in breach of Regulation 13 - Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment, and Regulation 17 - good governance. The service had been rated ‘Requires Improvement’ at that time.

We had identified inconsistencies in the way safeguarding incidents had been managed. We had also found appropriate action had not always been taken to protect people from harm. Quality assurance systems had not always been effective in assessing, monitoring and improving the quality of the service. Following that inspection, the registered manager had sent in an action plan stating what action would be taken to address the breach of the regulations. At this inspection we found sufficient action had been taken in relation to the concerns identified at the previous inspection.

Ability Housing Prospect Lane is a domiciliary care agency which provides care services to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection 19 people were receiving a personal care service, 15 of whom lived in supported living accommodation and 4 in their own homes in the community. The agency provides a service to adults with learning disabilities.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People received safe care from staff who had been trained to protect people and identify signs of abuse. Risk assessments were implemented and reflected the current level of risk to people. Staff understood their responsibilities to report any concerns and followed the provider's policies in relation to safeguarding and whistleblowing.

Medicines were administered as prescribed by appropriately trained staff who were aware of the potential risks involved in medicine management.

The service followed safe recruitment procedures to make sure that only suitable staff were employed at the agency.

Some relatives of people and staff told us that due to the turnover of staff and extensive use of agency staff, people did not always receive appropriate care. The manager presented evidence that once concerns about agency staff had been acknowledged, the staff members in question were not employed to work with people any more.

Staff received a wide range of training that matched people's needs. Staff were encouraged and supported to develop their skills and knowledge, which improved people's experience of care.

Staff were provided with supervision meetings regularly and they felt supported by the management to perform their roles.

The registered manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Records showed that people and their families were involved in the process of planning people’s care. People made their own decisions about their care and support. Staff understood they could only care for and support people who consented to receive care.

People were provided with sufficient amounts of food and drink. Staff supported people to access a range of health care services which ensured people’s health was monitored and maintained.

People were treated with kindness and their privacy and dignity were always respected. People were encouraged to voice their opinions on how their care should be provided and their feedback was taken into consideration. Care plans were agreed upon with each person or their close relative if appropriate, with people's rights and independence taken into account.

The registered provider had a compliments and complaints policy and a relevant procedure following the policy. People told us that complaints were responded to and resolved in a timely manner. Staff assured us they knew how to complain and that they were confident any complaints would be listened to and acted on.

Quality checks took place regularly and identified actions needed to be taken to enhance the service. The registered manager was devoted to providing people with such care so that they were able to live as independently as possible. The manager involved staff in promoting an open and positive culture. Staff knew how to put the aims and values of the service into practice so people received personalised care. Staff, relatives and other professionals spoke positively about the registered manager.