You are here

SENSE - 21a and 21b Johnson Avenue Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 15 March 2016

During a routine inspection

This was an announced inspection carried out on 15 March 2016.

21a and 21b Johnson Avenue can provide accommodation and care for six people who have a learning disability and who live with reduced sight or hearing. There were six people living in the service at the time of our inspection. Most of the people had special communication needs and used personal versions of sign assisted language to express themselves. The accommodation was two houses that were next door to each other and which had a connecting hallway on the first floor.

There was 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.

Staff knew how to respond to any concerns that might arise so that people were kept safe from abuse. People had been helped to avoid the risk of accidents and medicines were managed safely. There were enough staff on duty and background checks had been completed before new staff were appointed.

Staff had received training and guidance and they knew how to support people in the right way including how to respond to people who had special communication needs. People had been assisted to receive all of the healthcare assistance they needed.

Staff had ensured that people’s rights were respected by helping them to make decisions for themselves. The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how registered persons apply the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and to report on what we find. These safeguards protect people when they are not able to make decisions for themselves and it is necessary to deprive them of their liberty in order to keep them safe. In relation to this, the registered manager had worked with the relevant local authorities to ensure that people only received lawful care that respected their rights.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff recognised people’s right to privacy, respected confidential information and promoted people’s dignity.

People had been consulted about the support they wanted to receive and they had been given all of the assistance they needed, including people who could become distressed. People had been helped to enjoy a wide range of interests and hobbies. There was a system for resolving complaints.

Quality checks had been completed to ensure that people received safe support. Good team work was promoted and staff were supported to speak out if they had any concerns because the service was run in an open and inclusive way. People had benefited from staff acting upon good practice guidance.

Inspection carried out on 1 October 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited the service when three people who lived there were present. We were not able to speak with everyone because three people were away on holiday.We were unable to gain people’s views because of the different ways people communicated. We spent time observing care, speaking to staff and reviewing records to see what it was like living at the home.

We spoke with the relatives of two people and one health care professional who provided support for people with a learning disability.

One relative told us that the relationships between staff and their relative were “ As perfect as they could be and that staff acted quickly to address any issues identified by them or their relative."

Another relative told us they were happy with the support provided for their relative. They said “People living at the home have quite a good life with trips out for meals and visits to Peterborough.” They told us “Staff were very good with everyone and seemed competent and experienced.” They also said “Staff were coping well with the medical problems their relative had recently had.” Another relative told us staff supported their relative to send emails using a brail keypad.

We found people were supported to be independent by attending the specialist resource centre daily, shopping for their own food, clothes and toiletries. Each person had a designated support worker who was responsible for spending time with the person on their one home day a week.

Inspection carried out on 6 December 2012

During a routine inspection

Sense – 21a and 21b Johnson Avenue provides care for 6 deaf blind people. On the day we visited all of the people who lived at the home were present. However we were unable to gain people’s views because of the different ways people communicated. We spent time observing care, speaking to staff and reviewing records to see what it was like to live at the home.

We saw people were asked for their consent before care was given. Where people lacked capacity to consent care plans contained information on who to include to make a decision in the persons best interest.

We could see people were happy and relaxed in the home. There were good relationships between care staff and people living there.

The home was clean and tidy.

Staffing levels enabled people’s needs to be met. Staff were able to respond to changes in care needs to ensure people were safe and looked after.

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

Inspection carried out on 12 January 2012

During a routine inspection

We communicated, briefly, with two people using the service and observed communication between staff and other people. Staff gave them choices about what they wanted to eat and drink and all staff we spoke with clearly knew people's individual preferences.

It was clear that people wanted to have the individual attention of their preferred staff member in order to have their daily needs met and so that they felt safe and secure in their home.

The manager told us that they always communicated with people individually

on a daily basis and checked if people were satisfied with their care.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)