Gables Manor

Right Support: People were supported to have choice and control of their lives; however, it was not always possible to ascertain from records whether staff were supporting them in the least restrictive way and in their best interests. Risks to people were assessed and monitored, however risk assessments and care plans did not always reflect the most important and up to date information. Staff supported people to access health and social care support in the community and supported people to be involved in maintaining their own health and wellbeing where possible. People could communicate and understand information given to them because they were receiving consistent support from regular staff. Staff were recruited safely and had the necessary skills, knowledge, and experience to provide safe and effective care. There were enough staff to meet people's needs. People were able to choose activities and pursue volunteer work that was tailored to them.

Right Care: Staff were appropriately trained and understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse, however unexplained injuries were not always reported to management when required. Care records contained risk assessments with guidance for staff to follow, however they did not always contain all the relevant information found in other sections of care plans. Medicines were managed safely, although care plans had not always been updated following changes. Some areas in the premises were not clean and there were some concerns relating to the environment that posed an infection, prevention control risk. Support was person-centred and promoted people's dignity, privacy, and human rights, however staff had used informal language in some people's care plans that could be seen as disrespectful. People had a choice about their living environment and were able to personalise their rooms. The service worked together with healthcare professionals and relatives to ensure people's assessed needs were met.

Right Culture:

The registered manager promoted a person-centred environment and people spoke positively about the management team and staff; however, the providers quality monitoring systems were very informal and had failed to mitigate the risks in relation to incident reporting and post-incident analysis reviews. Care plan audits were not effective in ensuring they contained the most relevant and up to date information about people to keep them safe. Some records needed to be reviewed to ensure all information was written respectfully. Staff were responsive to people's needs and evaluated the quality of support provided to people, involving the person, their families and other professionals as appropriate.