We carried out a review of the data available to us about Mary & Joseph House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Mary & Joseph House, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice:
There was an excellent range of in-house activities and opportunities available to people while they followed the COVID-19 lockdown rules.
The open, inclusive and supportive nature of the service meant that promoting equality and diversity and respecting people's human rights was a golden thread that ran through every aspect of the service.
The entrance to the home was well managed. The area was spacious and ample PPE and hand-cleansing fluids were provided. The reception staff were well versed in the protocol and diligent in ensuring sure COVID-19 best practice infection control and prevention rules were followed so that residents were protected.
The service introduced a staff uniform which is laundered on site at the required high temperature. The residents were involved in making this decision.
Visitors to home needed to complete a COVID-19 test with a negative result before entrance, this was done at Mary and Joseph House on the day of the visit.
Mary & Joseph House provides high quality accommodation and personal care to adult males with enduring mental health needs. Accommodation is provided from 11 self-contained flats and 30 single bedrooms. At the time of this inspection, 40 people used the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
The service maintained its overall rating of Outstanding awarded at the last inspection in 2016. People, relatives and health and social care professionals continued to describe the service as exceptional and said care was extremely person-centred and responsive.
There was a truly open and welcoming atmosphere on entering the premises. The registered manager, staff and people living at the home were enthusiastic about the inspection visit and were eager to share experiences.
Staff were exceptionally kind and caring towards people and had developed very strong relationships with them, knowing them well, including their histories, likes and dislikes. People had a say in the staff who worked at the service and who supported them.
The service was exceptional at helping people achieve positive outcomes, building confidence, independence and helping people develop and restore life skills.
There was an excellent range of activities and opportunities available to people. People had been introduced to new activities, which had led to the development of hobbies, friendships and opportunities for volunteering. Through exceptional care planning people had become more independent.
Mary & Joseph House was a fully accessible building that exceeded people’s needs. Since our last inspection, improvements continued to be made to enhance internal aspects of the home, and externally within the grounds. Key standout features included a brand new bistro, refurbished dining room and games room, and the installation of seven new raised allotment beds and a new greenhouse for growing flowers and vegetables.
The registered manager and the wider leadership team were inspiring and dedicated to providing support which met the highest of standards. They strived for excellence through collaboration; they were passionate and dedicated to providing an outstanding service to people.
The registered manager had won two prestigious awards in recognition of her outstanding leadership, commitment to developing talent, and unwavering commitment to providing high quality care.
The open, inclusive and supportive nature of the service meant that promoting equality and diversity and respecting people’s human rights was a golden thread that ran through every aspect of the service.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Rating at last inspection:
At the last inspection the service was rated ‘Outstanding’ in all areas. (published 19 December 2016).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Mary & Joseph House provides high quality accommodation and personal care to adult males with enduring mental health needs. Mary and Joseph House is part of the Joseph Cox Charity founded in 1963, and has been in its present purpose built house since 1993.
At the time of our inspection there were 41 people living at the home. The home specialises in the care of people living with Korsakoff syndrome. Korsakoff syndrome is a chronic memory disorder caused by severe deficiency of thiamine (vitamin B-1). Korsakoff syndrome is most commonly caused by alcohol misuse, but certain other conditions also can cause the syndrome.
The property provides 11 self-contained flats and 30 single bedrooms. The home has been built to an exceptionally good modern standard, specifically adapted for people living with dementia. The home provides accommodation over two floors arranged in five suites. There is a lift, a games room, dining room, chapel, art studio, project room and two lounges on the ground floor. There was a sensory garden for people and their relatives to enjoy that stimulated the senses of smell and hearing.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
There was a truly open atmosphere on entering the premises. People could access the internet if they wanted to and could use a tablet computer provided by the service if they wished to send emails or skype family. All areas within the home had been designed for the needs of the people. There was plenty of communal space, lounges, and dining areas were available to people, as were quiet areas where people could sit in peace. We observed that this was a very safe home with a well-designed system enabling staff and visitors to move freely within the home. A relative said, “I know my dad is extremely safe at Mary & Joseph House, the environment doesn’t restrict his movement.”
The registered manager was inspiring and dedicated to providing care which met the highest of standards. They strived for excellence through consultation, they were passionate and dedicated to providing an outstanding service to people. They led with a dynamic approach and continually reflected on how to improve the service further. They demonstrated a strong and supportive leadership style, seeking feedback in order to further improve what was offered. The provider's vision and values were understood and shared across the staff team, and they were fully supportive of development plans.
People's care plans were tailored for them as individuals with the involvement of their families at all stages. People were cared for by staff that knew them really well and understood how to support them to maximise their potential and attain their goals. People's progress was monitored and celebrated. Staff were constantly looking for opportunities to offer to people that would help them grow, gain confidence and live a fulfilled life. People were supported and encouraged with their goals of moving back into the community. People were able to participate in the quality assurance processes of their home and could undertake a variety of different training offered by the provider.
The culture of the service was open, transparent and progressive. All the staff were committed to continuous improvement of the service, individual care and looking at the provider as a whole.
People using the service, their representatives and the staff felt valued and important representatives of the organisation. The staff felt ownership of and followed the aims and objectives of the organisation. People using the service and their representatives gave very positive feedback about their experiences. The staff regularly consulted relatives and external professionals to ask for their opinions. Relatives and professionals told us how they felt the service was outstanding.
The service provided outstanding care to people which were continually reviewed to ensure the best possible outcomes. People, staff, relatives and professionals were extremely complimentary about the service and what it provided.
People living at the home felt happy and were able to follow their own personal interests. Activities were individualised and meaningful to people and designed around people's own interests and hobbies. Staff ensured people received a nutritious, balanced diet and people who required it were supported to eat their meals. People were very happy with the quality of their meals and said they were given enough to eat and drink.
Staffing levels were high to meet people’s needs. If people were upset or unwell and more staff were required, this was provided straight away to support people. Relatives of people who had been unwell said they were kept fully informed and said staff were allocated to their relatives to provide comfort and care. This was greatly appreciated by the relatives we spoke with.
People lived in a safe environment that had been designed and adapted to meet the specific needs of people who used the service. Staff made sure risk assessments were carried out and took steps to minimise risks without taking away people’s right to make decisions. There was a system of audits, checks and analysis to identify shortfalls and to rectify them so the quality of care could continually be improved and developed.
Staff demonstrated an in-depth awareness of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS).
People were always at the heart of the service. New staff were recruited with the involvement of people who used the service, in a safe way; all checks were in place before they started work and they received an induction.
A comprehensive induction and mentorship programme was in place for new staff and there was continuing training and development for established staff. There were four 'Champion' roles within the service where the provider had ensured staff had an enhanced level of knowledge in areas such as, infection control, dementia, dignity and hydration.
People were happy and felt safe. People's confidence and ability to be as independent as possible had grown since living at Mary & Joseph House. Their risks were managed effectively and they felt confident meeting new challenges with the support of the staff. They had their medicines administered safely and there were enough staff so that they could undertake the activities they wished and be supported in meeting their individual needs.
The provider had a quality assurance system in place, which was based on seeking the views of people, their relatives and other health and social care professionals. There was a systematic cycle of planning, action and review, reflecting aims and outcomes for people who used the service.
Complaints received were responded to thoroughly, and solutions put in place when possible. People were encouraged to share their opinions informally through comment cards in reception. Results of surveys were shared and actions they had taken in response to questionnaires and comment cards. People, their relatives and other health professionals were encouraged to share their opinions to ensure their views drove improvement. Planned improvements were focused specifically on improving people's quality of life.
Mary and Joseph House is a residential service providing care and support to adult men with enduring mental health needs and alcohol dependency. The property comprises of 11 self-contained flats and 30 single bedrooms. The home was fully occupied on the day of our inspection. People living at Mary & Joseph House have access to a wide range of facilities including; a games room, small lounge areas, an art therapy room, a workshop, a chapel and well maintained gardens. There is parking available for visitors. There is good access to all parts of the property.
The manager had worked at the service for 10 years and was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider.
We found the location to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. While no applications have been submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff have been trained to understand when an application should be made, and in how to submit one. People’s human rights were therefore properly recognised, respected and promoted.
People were involved and consulted with about their needs and wishes. Care records provided good information to direct staff in the safe delivery of people’s care and support. Records were kept under review so information reflected the current and changing needs of people. Information was stored securely ensuring confidentiality was maintained.
People were offered a wide range of activities both in and away from the home. These ranged from social and leisure activities to housekeeping and laundry. This offered people some structure to their day and helped those people intending to move to more independent living so they had the skills to manage.
Staff worked closely with healthcare agencies so that people received the care and treatment they needed. Information was shared with other services so that people continued to receive safe and effective care.
Records showed people who had applied to work at the service had been robustly recruited so only those applicants suitable for employment were offered work at the home.
Staff received on-going training and development in the areas of care and support people required. This helped to ensure staff had the knowledge and skills needed to meet the specific needs of people.
Sufficient numbers of staff were available to support people in meeting their emotional, social and physical needs so their health and well-being was maintained.
Systems to monitor and review the quality of service provided were in place to check that people received a quality service. People were offered a good standard of accommodation. Checks were made to the premises and servicing of equipment ensuring people were kept safe.
individuals. Staff told us they understood peoples' care and mental health needs. People
using the service had their needs, physical health, mental health and social support needs
assessed and monitored through the care planning processes and regular one to one
sessions.
The service worked in partnership with other providers to ensure people's health, safety and welfare needs were met. Information about people who used the service was obtained and shared appropriately.
People were supported in premises that were suitably designed and adequately maintained to meet their rehabilitation needs.
There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place and people were supported by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.
People's records, staff records and other records relevant to the management of the services were up to date, accurate and fit for purpose.
People who used the service told us they liked living at the home because they were treated with respect and because their needs were met. People's comments included:
'It's the longest place I've ever stayed.'
'I make a choice in all things.'
'I've got no problems at the moment and I'm very happy here.'
And
'The spirit of the place is excellent, all the staff are willing to give their attention to you when you need it.'
Staff said they liked working in the home. The Manchester city council officer said there were no concerns about the service provided at Mary and Joseph House.
We found that people gave informed consent to their care and treatment; were protected from harm and abuse and there were sufficient staff on duty with the skills to meet people's needs.
We found that Mary and Joseph met the individual needs of people and promoted their physical, emotional, and social wellbeing and development.
We saw that people using the service were supported to act as independently as possible to achieve a positive lifestyle and so their sense of self worth and personal value was promoted.