We carried out a review of the data available to us about Scott Hall Grove 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 Scott Hall Grove, you can give feedback on this service.
Scott Hall Grove is a ‘care home’. 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 service is part of Aspire Community Benefit Society. The Respite Service supports people at in a specially designed building. The service offers an opportunity for people to have short breaks from their family and also gives family carers a break from their caring responsibilities. The home has 10 respite beds, of which five are dedicated to crisis/emergency stay. It is situated in a quiet residential area on the outskirts of Leeds.
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 complex learning disability and nursing needs using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
At our last inspection we rated the service good overall. However, we found improvements were required in the safe domain. This was because we were not able to check if appropriate recruitment and identification checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This was because some recruitment information was held centrally at the organisations main office.
At this inspection we found appropriate recruitment checks were in place. Overall the service continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going 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.
The service has 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.
We received positive feedback from people using the service. We carried out observations to see how they were being supported and cared for. People told us they felt safe and the staff were respectful and observed their rights and choices. Feedback from relatives and health professionals was positive.
Staff received training to administer medicines safely. There were sufficient staff with the right skills and competencies to meet the assessed needs of people who used the service. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
People were encouraged to make decisions about meals, and were supported to go shopping. People’s dietary needs were catered for and we saw clear instructions were followed when a person had involvement from the speech and language therapist (SALT). Appropriate meals were provided for people from different cultural backgrounds.
People retained their own GP while staying at the service, but if needed the service could also access emergency services.
People could take part in activities of their own choice and there were also organised group activities such as trips to the coast and meals at local pubs.
Relatives and staff were happy with the way in which the service was run. The service was appropriately managed. There were comprehensive systems for monitoring the quality of the service. The registered manager and staff team listened to and learnt from the feedback of others to make changes and improve the service.
Scothall Grove is part of Aspire Community Benefit Society. The Respite Service supports people at Scothall Grove in a specially designed building. The service offers an opportunity for people to have short breaks from their family and also gives family carers a break from their caring responsibilities. The home has 10 respite beds, of which five are dedicated to crisis/emergency stay.
A registered manager was in post and present for the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. 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.
We looked at records relating to the personal care that the service was providing and found care was well planned and reviews involved the people receiving care and their families.
We did not judge recruitment procedures to be safe because staff application forms and references were not available to be inspected. This was a breach of a requirement and we have asked the provider to make improvement. We saw appropriate background checks were undertaken to ensure new staff were not barred from working with vulnerable people. There were sufficient, appropriately skilled staff to provide care and support at all times.
The provider had policies and procedures relating to the safe administration of medication. This gave guidance to staff on their roles and responsibilities.
People told us they felt safe using the service. We observed very good relationships between people and their support workers and saw policies and practice that ensured people’s privacy and dignity were respected. Staff spoke highly of the registered provider and felt well supported by them.
We saw the support plans were detailed and included information on how to meet people’s religious and cultural needs, the activities they took part in and how to manage any behaviour that could be challenging.
The staff we spoke with were able to describe how people preferred their care and support to be delivered and the importance of treating them with respect. People who used the service told us staff were very caring and always provided care and support in line with their agreed support plan.
There was a complaints procedure available which enabled people to raise any concerns or complaints about the care or support they received. The people we spoke with and their relatives told us they were aware of the complaints procedure and would have no hesitation in making a formal complaint if they had any concerns about the standard of care provided.
We saw the provider had a quality assurance monitoring system that continually monitored and identified shortfalls in service provision.