The Spinnies

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The Spinnies accommodates up to four people with a learning disability and or autism. On the day of our inspection, two people were using the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

At the last inspection in June 2016, the service was rated ‘Good’ in all the key questions. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People were supported to remain safe and staff were aware of their responsibilities to protect people from abuse avoidable harm. People were supported with positive risk taking and risks were managed effectively. There were sufficient staff available to support people safely and safe staff recruitment processes were in place and followed. People’s medicines were managed by staff who had received appropriate training and competency assessments. People were protected from risks associated with cross contamination. Infection control measures were being used and understood by staff.

The provider used national guidance and tools to assess people’s needs. Staff received an induction, ongoing training and support to ensure they were competent in meeting people’s needs. People received a choice of meals and drinks and had access to snacks. Nutritional needs were assessed and monitored. The environment met people’s individual needs.

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 support this practice. Staff were aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were supported by staff who were caring and compassionate who knew their needs, preferences and what was important to them. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity, encouraged people with choice making, and promoted independence. Independent advocacy information was available. Relatives and external professionals were involved in meetings to discuss and agree how care and support was provided.

People’s needs and routines had been assessed and support plans provided staff with clear detailed information of how to support people. Staff had a person centred approach in how they supported people and enabled them to lead active and fulfilling lives.

Relatives and staff were positive about the management team, who were appropriately experienced, competent and good leaders. Systems and processes were in place to monitor quality and safety and these were up to date. The provider had an ongoing action plan that showed how the service was continually improving.

The Spinnies is a care home (without nursing) for up to four people with a learning disability and/or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were four people living at the service.

The Spinnies is required to have 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. At the time of our inspection a manager was in post and they had submitted their registered manager application and this was being processed. We will monitor this.

People who used the service were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff were aware of their role and responsibilities in protecting people. Staff understood the different categories of abuse and had received adult safeguarding training. Information was available for staff about the provider’s procedure to report any safeguarding concerns.

Risks associated to people’s individual needs had been assessed and planned for. Staff had the required information to know how to support people to reduce known risks. Risk plans were reviewed regularly and amended when required. Risks associated to the environment and premises had been assessed and work was being completed to improve safety.

The provider had completed appropriate recruitment checks before staff began work to check their suitability. Staffing levels were sufficient in meeting people’s individual needs and safety. People who used the service received their medicines as prescribed and these were managed correctly.

Staff were appropriately supported to enable them to effectively carry out their duties and responsibilities. This included receiving an induction and ongoing training opportunities to keep their skills and knowledge up to date. Staff also received regular meetings to review their work and development needs.

The manager understood their role and responsibility in ensuring the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards legislation was adhered to. Staff were knowledgeable about the principles of this legislation.

People received sufficient to eat and drink and the menu choice was based on people’s needs and known preferences. Whilst staff understood they had a responsibility to promote healthy eating this area could be improved upon.

Staff supported people to maintain their health, this included accessing both routine and specialist healthcare services. The service involved external health and social care professionals appropriately in meeting people’s individual needs.

Staff were kind and caring, they clearly had a good understanding of people’s needs and what was important to them. Staff supported people to participate in activities, interests and hobbies of their choice. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted. People’s care records showed a person centred approach was used by staff. Information was based on people’s individual choices, routines and what was important to them.

A complaints policy was in place and staff were aware of how to respond to any complaints or concerns made. People had access to information that was presented in an appropriate format for their communication needs. The manager was aware of independent advocacy services should this support have been required. People, their relatives or representatives received opportunities to share their views about the service.

Staff felt valued and supported and were positive about the leadership of the service. The provider had checks in place that monitored the quality and safety of the service. These included daily, weekly and monthly audits.

We spoke with a relative of a person who used the service. They told us, 'My relative gets the care they need. Staff have helped to calm down my relative and have shared positive relationships with them.' During our inspection we saw that people took part in activities and staff were able to meet people's individual requirements.

We saw that care plans contained information in 'easy read' formats to help people who used the service to understand their care plans as fully as possible. We saw that care plans and risk assessments had been reviewed by the manager on a regular basis.

We spoke with three staff who were all able to tell us the procedures in place to make a safeguarding referral. We checked staff training records and found that most staff had completed safeguarding training.

During our inspection we did not observe any evidence of insufficient staffing levels during our observation of lunch and throughout the rest of our inspection.

One staff member told us, 'I'm happy with my supervision and appraisal schedule. I've just had my appraisal recently.' The manager had identified training specific to the needs of people who used the service and staff had attended these courses or were booked to attend these courses, including autism and epilepsy. This meant staff were supported to deliver care effectively to meet the needs of people who used the service.

We spoke with a relative of a person who used the service and they were aware of the complaints system and felt happy to raise concerns with staff directly or with the manager. People who used the service had reported issues; these had been dealt with by the service and individuals who had raised issues were happy with the actions taken.