We carried out a review of the data available to us about Bluebell 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 Bluebell House, you can give feedback on this service.
51 Bellevue Grove is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The service at 51 Bellevue Grove is based in a detached house in a residential area of Middlesbrough, close to local amenities. It provides support and accommodation for up to three people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were two people living at 51 Bellevue Grove.
This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered by CQC in November 2017.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.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with 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.
Safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures were in place to help protect people from harm. Staff knew how to identify and report suspected abuse. There were suitable numbers of staff on duty to ensure people’s needs were met. Pre-employment checks were made to reduce the likelihood of employing unsuitable staff.
Risks to people were assessed and staff knew what to do to reduce identified risks to people. Environmental risk assessments were also in place covering some of the tasks carried out by staff. Medicines were administered safely. Maintenance and equipment checks were undertaken to help ensure the environment was safe. Emergency contingency plans were in place. Staff followed infection control practices to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.
The registered manager told us that lessons were learnt when they reviewed accidents and incidents to determine any themes or trends.
Staff received the training, supervision and appraisal they needed to be able to carry out their role effectively including specialist training to equip them to meet the individual needs of the people they supported. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team.
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.
People had access to a range of healthcare such as GPs and hospital services. The service worked with a range of health and social care professionals to ensure people’s individual needs were being met. People’s nutritional needs were met.
People were encouraged to maintain and develop their independent living skills and carried out household tasks such as cooking and cleaning with support from staff.
Care was planned and delivered in a way that responded to people’s individual needs. People were supported by a regular team of staff who were knowledgeable about their preferences. Staff were kind and respectful to people. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
Policies and practices within the service helped to ensure that everyone was treated equally. Staff encouraged people to access a range of activities.
The provider and registered manager had a quality assurance system in place. Audits covered areas such as support plans, complaints and safeguarding. People knew how to complain and a complaints procedure was in place.
Meetings for staff and people who used the service were held regularly. This enabled people to be involved in decisions about how the service was run.