All inspections: The Old Police House - Care Quality Commission

The Old Police House provides care and support for up to eight older people who have a learning disability and a physical disability. People require 24 hour staff support in the home and support to go out. The home is situated in a quiet residential area in the small village of Nunney.

A registered manager was responsible for the home. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This inspection took place on 23 and 25 September 2015 and was unannounced. It was carried out by one inspector.

People had communication difficulties associated with their learning difficulty. We therefore used our observations of care and our discussions with people’s parents and staff to help form our judgements.

The home was a safe place for people. Staff understood people’s needs and provided the care and support they needed. One parent said “I’ve no concerns about safety. The staff make sure people are always safe.”

The service supported people to make as many choices about their own lives as they could. People used community facilities and their independence was encouraged. People appeared happy with the care they received and interacted well with staff.

People received very good support from health and social care professionals. Staff were skilled at communicating with people, especially if people were unable to communicate verbally.

Staff had built close, trusting relationships with people over time. The care provided and the environment was adapted to meet people’s changing needs. One parent said “It’s a lovely home with brilliant staff.”

People, and those close to them, were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support. There was a very close relationship and good communication with people’s parents. Parents felt their views were listened to and acted on.

Communication and morale throughout the staff team was good. Staff were well supported and well trained. All staff spoken with said the support they received was very good. Staff spoke highly of the care they were able to provide to people. One parent said “We are so happy with care. The care is wonderful; we couldn’t ask for better.”

There was a management structure in the home which provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability. The management team strived to provide the best level of care possible to people. The aims of the service were well defined and adopted by the staff team

There were effective quality assurance processes in place to monitor care and safety and plan ongoing improvements. There were systems in place to share information and seek people’s views about the running of the home.

We observed care practices, talked to people in the service and staff and viewed records to help us understand how people viewed this service, because people did not communicate verbally and were not able to tell us about their experiences.

The service had policies and procedures in place that ensured people's needs and wishes were assessed and recorded prior to support plans being written.

Care records were clear to read and ensured the person and their family were at the centre of all decisions. Care records were regularly reviewed to remain current.

During our inspection, we saw staff supporting people with a variety of activities. Through their actions, staff showed how well they knew each person's needs. Staff supported people patiently and respectfully.

We saw staff offered people choices and were knowledgeable about how people communicated those choices.

Staff were knowledgeable and confident about their safeguarding responsibilities and how they would respond to any suspicion of abuse or other concerns.

There were processes in place to monitor the quality of service being provided and we saw that the opinions of people's families were obtained through surveys.

The people living at The Old Police House were not able to tell us what they thought about the care they received. This was due to limited verbal communication. During our inspection we observed staff treating people with kindness and patience. Staff demonstrated how well they knew people's needs and ensured people were treated with privacy and dignity. Staff offered people choices and showed understanding of how people communicated. We found staff had a wide knowledge of people's interests and abilities, which was used to support people to be involved with activities relevant to them.

As part of this inspection we contacted three relatives of people living at the home shortly after our visit. The views of people we spoke with and our findings were summed up through what people told us. Comments included: 'staff ensure privacy and dignity is maintained. They offer choices to enable people to make decisions about things, such as what to wear. We are satisfied with the care and support provided and staff keep us informed of anything relevant regarding the health and welfare of our relative.' Another comment was 'the staff are caring and experienced and know my relative very well. I am confident any concerns would be dealt with promptly and effectively.'

Staff told us they were clear about their safeguarding responsibilities and how they would respond to any suspicion of abuse and other concerns.

People who lived in the home had communication difficulties. Some people who lived in the home were able to confirm that staff provided the care and support they needed and that staff were kind to them. We observed how staff interacted with people who lived in the home and all the interactions we saw were kind and respectful. Staff asked three people if they were happy living at the home and they said that they were.

We saw that staff ensured people were given the opportunity to make choices. Some people were able to say what they would like and staff respected people's views. Other people were not able to express their choices verbally so staff needed to interpret their responses to choices or read their body language; staff knew people well and appeared good at doing this.

People who lived in the home appeared well cared for and staff were available when they needed them. Staff clearly knew people well and had a good relationship with the people they supported. Some people were observed using the home's lounge and dining areas. One person went out and others spent time in their own rooms. People appeared very relaxed in the company of staff and with each other.

We observed how people were supported at lunchtime. The home's dining area was too small to accommodate all of the people who lived at the home so some people had to wait for their lunch until others had finished and left the dining room. We also saw that the kitchen was not easily accessible to all of the people who lived at the home so people could not access this room should they wish to help prepare meals or observe them being prepared.

Staff told us that people's families were very supportive and that they welcomed feedback from them. One member of staff said 'lots of people have said this is a very friendly and welcoming home. People's families are happy on the whole; a couple have said the care we provide is very good'.

These older reports are from our old approaches to inspection, including those from before CQC was created.

Archived: The Old Police House

All Inspections

23 and 25 September 2015

During a routine inspection

10 October 2013

During a routine inspection

7 March 2013

During a routine inspection

20 January 2012

During a routine inspection

Reports under our old system of regulation