Archived: Champion House - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities

Champion House - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities, known to people, their relatives and staff as Champion House, is situated in Calverley, a rural area mid-way between Leeds and Bradford. It is part of the Leonard Cheshire Disability company. The care home accommodates 27 people in one adapted building and provides residential and respite care, over two floors. Rooms are singly occupied and provide necessary aids and adaptations to suit people’s individual requirements. There are well appointed communal areas and communal bath and shower rooms located on each floor. On both days of our inspection there were 25 people living at Champion House, providing care and support for people with a physical disability.

When we completed our previous inspection on 3 February 2017 we found the registered provider was not meeting the regulation relating to the management of medicines. We issued a requirement notice as systems in place did not ensure people received their medicines as prescribed. Following the last inspection, we asked the registered provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the service.

The purpose of this inspection was to see if improvements had been made with management of medicine and to review the quality of the service currently being provided for people. We also wanted to look at recent concerns raised by a whistle-blower and information shared with CQC about the two incidents which indicated potential risks. ‘Whistleblowing’ is when a worker reports suspected wrong doing at work. At this inspection we found the service had met the requirement notice in regards to the management of medicines.

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 who used the service told us they felt safe with the care they received and there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff and the registered manager had a good understanding of safeguarding adults and knew what to do to keep people safe. A new medication management system had recently been introduced and staff were getting used to the recording of the administration medicines. We found the registered provider had appropriate arrangements currently in place to manage people’s medicines safely. We found people had access to healthcare services to make sure their health care needs were met.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff. Robust recruitment procedures were in place and staff completed an induction when they started working for the registered provider. Staff received the training which ensured people received appropriate care and support to meet their individual needs.

People told us they enjoyed the meals provided and their suggestions were incorporated into menus. We observed the dining experience was a pleasant occasion and people received appropriate support with their meal when required.

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

We found the home was well maintained, bedrooms had been personalised and communal areas were comfortably furnished. We saw throughout our inspection people were treated with sensitivity and kindness. Staff had a good rapport with people. People’s dignity and privacy was respected. Staff had a good knowledge and understanding of people’s needs and worked together as a team.

Support plans were detailed and provided information about people’s individual needs and preferences. There was opportunity for people to be involved in a range of activities within the home or the local community. We saw people enjoying the different activities available during our inspection.

The registered manager promoted a person-centred approach to end of life care.

Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and people who used the service had opportunity to comment on the quality of service and influence service delivery. People and staff told us they found the registered manager approachable and they listened to them. People told us if they needed to complain they would speak with the registered manager.

The service had good management and leadership. Effective systems were in place which ensured people received safe quality care. Complaints were welcomed and were investigated and responded to appropriately.

Champion House provides care for up to 27 people who have a physical disability. The service had a registered manager. 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.

We asked people who used the service if they felt safe; they told us they did. Staff also told us everyone was safe living and working at Champion House. People lived in a safe and pleasant environment. Systems were in place to manage risk to individuals, however, medicines were not managed consistently and safely. The provider took action to address the issues promptly when we raised this with them. During the inspection we observed people received support at appropriate times, which indicated there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. There was a better system in place which ensured people received agreed one to one staffing. Robust recruitment processes ensured staff suitability was checked before they were employed.

Staff were supported to do their job well. They received appropriate training and supervision which ensured they understood their role and responsibilities. Staff we spoke with had good knowledge around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how to support people who did not have capacity to make some decisions. People were happy with the quality and variety of meals. Menus offered people choice including healthy options. Arrangements were in place to make sure people’s specialist dietary requirements were met and a range of other professionals were involved to help make sure people stayed healthy.

People were well cared for. Staff knew the people they were supporting well. This included people’s individual communication skills, likes, and preferences. Staff had attended training called ‘a day in my shoes’ which helped them understand people’s experience at Champion House. End of life care planning was being further developed to make sure people’s wishes were known. Information was displayed to help promote choice and keep people informed.

People’s needs had been assessed and care plans contained good information which guided staff around how care should be delivered. Care plans covered what was important to the person, what they wanted to achieve and what support they needed. People were enabled to carry out person centred activities. The service had recently received a new minibus which provided people with more opportunities to access the community. People who used the service were encouraged to share their views and attended monthly meetings where they discussed topics that were relevant to the home. Systems were in place to respond to concerns and complaints. The service had received compliments about the quality of care provided.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor most areas of the service; however, auditing processes for management of medicines had not picked up issues identified at the inspection. People were regularly involved with the service and their feedback was positive about the way the service was managed. Staff we spoke with told us the registered manager led the service well and had driven improvement.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) regulations 2014. You can see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

We observed medication being administered with a weekly audit taking place and full records were accessed.

The five relatives we spoke with told us that there was always sufficient staff on duty when they visited and that staff appeared competent and well trained.