Archived: 34 St Ronans Road

Updated 24 June 2016

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 25 May 2016 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection because it is small and there are often times when people and staff are out taking part in activities. Therefore we needed to be sure that they would be in. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

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. Due to technical problems a PIR was not available and we took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

We also looked at notifications. Notifications are sent to the Care Quality Commission to inform us of events relating to the service which they are required to tell us about by law. The service had not had any reason to send a notification since the previous inspection.

We contacted and spoke with the quality and performance team at the local authority. We also requested feedback from three other professionals with knowledge of the service however, we did not receive a reply.

During the inspection we spoke with the six people who use the service. We also spoke with five members of staff including the registered manager, the practice manager and three care staff. Following the inspection we spoke with two relatives of people using the service.

We observed meal time activities and made general observations in the communal areas of the service. We also observed people taking part in activities supported by staff. We reviewed three people’s support plans and four staff files including recruitment records. We reviewed staff duty rotas, quality assurance surveys, audits and a selection of other documents relating to the management of the service.

Updated 24 June 2016

This inspection took place on 25 May 2016 and was announced. 34 St Ronan’s Road is a residential care home providing care and accommodation for up to six people with a learning disability. On the day of the inspection there were six people living at the service.

At the time of the inspection 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 were safe. Systems were in place to manage risks to people, visitors and staff. Health and safety checks were conducted to ensure the safety of the premises and the environment. Staff knew their responsibilities and how to respond to any safeguarding concerns. They felt any concerns would be taken seriously and acted upon by the managers of the service.

A robust recruitment procedure helped to ensure suitable staff were employed at the service to support people. People received their medicines safely and when they required them.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Staff received training and were supported in their role by regular one to one meetings and team meetings to discuss their work and matters relevant to the service. Annual appraisals allowed staff to reflect on their achievements and plan their future development needs.

Staff gained people’s consent before providing support and care. People’s right to make decisions was protected and when necessary decisions were made in their best interests.

People were supported to stay healthy. Healthcare advice was sought and followed through appropriately. Regular reviews of people’s health and wellbeing were undertaken.

People were supported to eat and drink. A variety of nutritional food was available in sufficient quantities to maintain a balanced diet. People were supported in their choice of food and drink and when necessary their nutritional intake was monitored.

People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing decisions about their care. Staff were kept up to date with information related to the changing needs of people they supported.

There were positive interactions between people and staff. Humour as well as compassion was seen throughout the inspection in the dialogue and relationships observed.

People were supported in a variety of activities that were available for people to take part in. These were based on their personal preferences and needs.

Feedback was invited to help assess the quality of the service and assist in its development. A complaints procedure was available but no complaints had been received since the previous inspection.

We found an open culture in the service. People, staff and relatives thought the service was well-led and managed. Staff were comfortable to approach the registered manager or practice manager for advice and guidance. They felt they all worked together as a team for the benefit of the people they supported.

The quality of the service was monitored by the registered manager and provider through a system of audits and reviews.