We carried out a review of the data available to us about Horninglow Bungalows 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 Horninglow Bungalows, you can give feedback on this service.
Horninglow Bungalows provides personal care for up to 16 adults with a learning disability and associated conditions. People were supported within three bungalows which were situated next door to each other. The Bungalows were owned and maintained by another provider and people that lived in these bungalows had a tenancy agreement with this provider. There were 12 people using the service 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. The registered manager oversaw the running of the full service and was supported by senior care manager, care managers and senior support workers.
People were supported to understand how to keep safe and staff were clear on their role on protecting people from the risk of harm. Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns and record safety incidents. These were reviewed and analysed to ensure actions could be taken to reduce risks and promote a safe environment. Individual risks to people were identified and people were supported to take reasonable risks to promote independent living. Environmental risks within people’s homes were also undertaken and people were supported to raise any concerns regarding improvements with their landlord, to ensure they were protected by the prevention and control of infection.
People were protected against the risk of abuse, as checks were made to confirm staff were of good character. People told us and we saw there were sufficient staff available to support them. The skill mix of staff ensured people’s needs were met. Medicines were managed safely and people were supported as needed to take their medicine as prescribed.
People were consulted regarding their preferences and interests and these were incorporated into their support plan to ensure they were supported to lead the life they wanted to. People were supported to be as independent as they could be and assistive technology was in place to support people in achieving this. The staff team knew people well and were provided with the right training and support to enable them to promote people’s independence and autonomy.
People were supported with their dietary needs and to access healthcare services to maintain good health. A period of transition was provided to support people when they moved to or from the service. This was done with other organisations to ensure the person received coordinated support that met their needs and preferences.
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. The importance of gaining people’s consent to the support they received was understood by the staff team. Staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported them to make their own decisions. Where people were unable to make certain decisions the staff ensured that best interest decisions were made in accordance with legislation. Where people needed support to manage their behaviours and keep safe; this was provided in a proportionate way and monitored with the support of healthcare professionals.
People were supported develop and maintain interests and be part of the local community to promote equality and integration. The registered manager actively sought and included people and their representatives in the planning of care. Assistive technology was in place where people did not receive 24 hour support; to enable them to seek assistance when needed. There were processes in place for people to raise any complaints and express their views and opinions about the service provided. People were supported to express their emotions and grieve following the death of a loved one.
A positive culture was in place that promoted good outcomes for people. People who used the service, their relatives and the staff team were all involved in developing the service; which promoted an open and inclusive culture. Staff had a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities and this was guided by the registered manager who empowered them to take responsibility and develop their skills. The registered manager and provider understood their legal responsibilities and kept up to date with relevant changes. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service to enable the registered manager and provider to drive improvement.
We inspected this service on 2 December 2015 and the inspection was announced. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. At our previous inspection in April 2013, the service was meeting the regulations that we checked.
Horninglow Bungalows provides personal care for adults with a learning disability and associated conditions. People were supported within three bungalows which were situated next door to each other. The bungalows were owned and maintained by another provider and people that lived in these bungalows had a tenancy agreement with this provider. There were 16 people using the service at the time of our 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. The registered manager oversaw the running of the full service and was supported by a senior care manager and two care managers.
Staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and systems and processes were in place to protect people from the risk of harm. People were protected against the risk of abuse, as checks were made to confirm staff were of good character and suitable to work in a care environment. People told us and we saw there were sufficient staff available to support them. Medicines were managed safely and people were supported to take their medicine as prescribed.
Staff had knowledge about people’s care and support needs to enable support to be provided in a safe way. Equipment was in place to meet people’s diverse needs which enabled them to maintain choice and independence. The provider understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported people to make their own decisions. People’s needs and preferences were met when they were supported with their dietary needs and people were supported to maintain good health.
The delivery of care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and preferences. People were supported develop and maintain hobbies and interests within the local community to promote equality and integration. The provider actively sought and included people and their representatives in the planning of care. There were processes in place for people to raise any complaints and express their views and opinions about the service provided. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service to enable the registered manager and provider to drive improvement.
We spoke with four people using the service, three staff, the registered manager and we spoke with two relatives on the telephone. Everyone we spoke with was happy with the service they received. One person told us, 'I like it. I am 100% happy.'
We found people's privacy and dignity were respected. We heard the staff were courteous, friendly and polite and support was provided by trained staff who knew the needs of people well.
We saw that people received care and support that met their individual needs. The care records included pictures and photographs to support people's understanding. The care records were kept up to date and included information about people's needs and preferences.
We saw there were sufficient staff available to meet the needs of people using the service, both at home and in the community.
We found the records were stored safely and correctly and systems were as required. This was to ensure people's confidential information was stored appropriately.
People using the service lived in three bungalows. Two bungalows accommodate six people and the third bungalow accommodates four people. Two of the bungalows receive 24 hour support and the bungalow with four people had assistive technology, such as bed sensors and door alarms.
People spoke well of the service, one person using the service told us, 'I am very happy here, the staff are kind to me and helpful.' A relative said, 'In my mind I am more than satisfied, my relative is always happy and looks well cared for.' Another person using the service said, 'I like the staff they are good. They knock on my door, take me shopping and let me choose my own things. They are very nice.'
People confirmed they were able to see their care records and confirmed that care and support was discussed with them. A clinical nurse specialist told us, 'The service is very open and willing; they are proactive and deliver good outcomes for people.'
People using the service confirmed they could speak with the staff if they had a concern or a complaint. This meant people felt able to voice their concerns and were listened to. One relative said, 'I feel comfortable to have a word if I have any worries.'