Sudbury Care Homes Limited

Updated 10 December 2020

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

This inspection took place on 17 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 10 December 2020

About the service

Sudbury Care Homes Limited is a residential care home providing personal care for up to five people. It specialises in supporting people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection, there were five people living at the home.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

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

People who lived in the home spoke positively about Sudbury Care Homes Limited. They were complimentary about the care they received and raised no concerns. They said they were safe in the home and treated with dignity and respect when being supported by care workers.

People were protected from abuse by staff who understood how to identify and report any abuse concerns. The risks to people’s health, safety and welfare had been assessed, recorded and plans put in place to reduce these. Staffing levels enabled people’s needs to be met safely and ensured people received a consistent and reliable level of care. Management sought to learn from any accidents or incidents involving people. Steps had been taken to protect people from the risk of infections.

We checked the arrangements in place in respect of medicines. Care workers had received medicines management training and policies and procedures were in place. Medicines Administration Records (MARs) were completed with no unexplained gaps.

Staff received an induction, followed by ongoing training and management support to enable them to work effectively. Staff spoke positively about their experiences working at the home and said that they received support from management. Teamwork was effective in the home and morale amongst staff was positive.

People were supported to follow healthy and nutritious diets. Any risks associated with their eating or drinking were assessed and managed. Staff and management worked effectively with community health and social care professionals to ensure people’s health needs were met and to achieve positive outcomes for them. 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 Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the deputy manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

Staff adopted a friendly, caring and professional approach in their work. People were supported to express their views about the care provided, and these were listened to. People were treated with dignity and respect at all times and staff promoted their independence. Staff and management understood the need to promote equality and diversity and consider people’s protected characteristics.

People and their relatives’ involvement in decision-making about the care provided was encouraged by staff and management. People’s care plans supported a person-centred approach. People had support to lead lifestyles of their choosing, access the local community and participate in recreational activities. People and their relatives understood how to raise any concerns or complaints about the service. People’s wishes and choices about their end of life care were explored with them.

Management promoted a positive and inclusive culture within the home, based upon open communication with people, relatives, community professionals and staff. Staff told us that management were approachable and felt their own work was valued. Quality assurance systems and processes were in place to enable management to monitor and improve the quality of people’s care.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 10 March 2017).

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.