Archived: Southview Care Home Limited

Southview Care Home Limited (referred to as Southview hereafter) is a residential care home for up to three people. It specialises in the care of people who have a learning disability and associated conditions such as autism. At the time of the inspection the service supported three people.

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 told us they felt safe living at the service, and that staff were kind and caring. People’s voice was heard and valued, and they benefited from attentive and person-centred support.

There was a positive and inclusive culture, which was derived from the providers values of: ‘Integrity, caring, and commitment - life is for living’.

Staff told us they felt well supported, received training to be able to meet people’s needs and that the service was well managed.

There was an open and transparent culture, which meant when things went wrong the registered manager and staff used it as a leaning opportunity.

There was a governance system in place, which was effective in helping to identify where improvements were required.

The provider worked in close partnership with other agencies, to the benefit of people who used the service.

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.

More information is in Detailed Findings below.

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

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of the report.

Rating at last inspection (and update)

The last rating for this service was Good (published 29 August 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Some people who lived in the home had limited communication or focus and used other methods of communication, for example gestures. We therefore used these, observations, care plans and discussed the best way to interact with people with staff who knew them well, to help us understand people and their experience at the home.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated good:

People remained safe at the service. There were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs and support them with activities and trips out. Risk assessments had been completed to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. This was particularly important for people who may challenge others. People received their medicines safely.

Each individual had a ‘Positive Behaviour Support Plan’ which was compiled on an individual basis, looking at behaviours specific to that individual, what their triggers were, signs for staff to look out for in advance and what staff could do at each level to either prevent further escalation or how to keep the individual and those around them safe.

People continued to receive care from staff who had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. Staff were competent and well trained. People had the support needed to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People's healthcare needs were monitored by the staff and people had access to a variety of healthcare professionals according to their individual needs.

Staff were very caring and people had built strong relationships with the staff. We observed staff being patient and kind, understanding how people liked to live as well as providing on-going opportunities to try new activities and maintain wellbeing. People's privacy was respected. People where possible, or their representatives, were very involved in decisions about the care and support people received.

The service remained responsive to people's individual needs and provided personalised care and support. People were able to make choices as much as possible in their day to day lives. There had been no complaints since the last inspection and the complaint process ensured any complaints would be fully investigated and responded to. People were supported to take part in a wide range of activities and trips out according to their individual interests.

The service continued to be well led. The provider was currently the registered manager but they were in the process of supporting the deputy manager to register as registered manager. People and staff told us the registered manager and current deputy manager were approachable and there was always a manager available for support. The registered manager/provider sought people's views to make sure people were at the heart of any changes within the home and regularly enabled them to have time to discuss any issues. The registered manager/provider had monitoring systems which enabled them to identify good practices and areas of improvement.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

During our visit to the home we saw sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people living in the home. The staff confirmed they were supported by the registered provider through supervisions and team meetings.

We saw that people's personal support plans described their needs and how those needs were met. We saw records that showed that best interest meetings had been arranged, for example to determine whether a particular medical procedure was in a person's best interest when they lacked capacity to make the decision themself.

We saw that medication was administered by the staff on duty. People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to administer and record medication.

We saw that Southview held records securely to protect people's confidentiality.

We saw that staff treated people with consideration and respect. For example, everyone was going out to a party on the evening of our visit and one person was particularly excited. We observed that the staff responded to this person with patience and kindness at all times.

We saw and heard staff speak to people in a way that demonstrated a good understanding of people's choices and preferences. They had a good understanding of what constituted abuse, and knew where they should go to report any suspicions they may have.

One person living in the home said, 'The staff are very good to me'.