Archived: MIlton Village

Updated 4 December 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was announced. We gave the service 48 hours' notice of the inspection. This was because it is an extra care housing service and we needed to be sure that the provider or manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with three people who used the service and one relative about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with five members of staff including the registered manager, area manager, and the complex manager, senior care worker, care workers.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and medicine records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records.

Updated 4 December 2019

About the service

Mayfair Home Care Limited provides personal care services for people living in their own flats within an extra care housing scheme at Milton Village. The scheme operates over three separate, purpose-built buildings Osprey, Brent and Crane Court that are within walking distance of each other. Each building has three floors with lift and stair access. There are some communal lounge areas within each building and a hairdressing salon in Brent building.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they felt safe. Staff understood their responsibilities about keeping people safe. Risks were identified and managed well. Incidents and accidents were monitored to inform practice and make improvements to the service. Staff had completed training in how to prevent the spread of infection whilst working in people's homes. Staff had completed training in medicines and their competence to administer medicines was checked regularly. Medicine administration records had been completed accurately.

The registered manager led by example and empowered their staff to provide high quality care and support.

Good staff performance was rewarded. Quality assurance processes helped the provider and the registered manager to identify and act on areas which could pose a risk to people's safety. The registered manager had a good knowledge of the regulatory requirement to report concerns to the CQC. People, relatives and staff praised the approach of the registered manager, whom they found to be supportive and approachable.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service provided people with personalised care that met their needs and took account of their wishes.

The registered manager developed people's care plans with them. If people requested changes to their planned care the registered manager tried to agree to the requested change. People knew how they could complain about the service. The registered manager had links with specialist services she could contact to support people as they reached the end of their lives.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 9 May 2017). Since this rating was awarded the registered provider of the service has changed. We have used the previous rating to inform our planning and decisions about the rating at this inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.