St Anne's, Huddersfield Mental Health Services

The home is registered to provide accommodation and support for four people aged 18 years and over who experience mental health problems. On the day of inspection there were four people living at the home.

At our last inspection we rated the service overall as good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the overall rating of good and 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.

Beech Street 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.

At the time of our inspection the home had 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.

Most people told us they felt safe living at Beech Street. Appropriate action had been taken in response to one person who did not feel this was the case. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to report abuse. No new staff had been recruited since our last inspection, so we were unable to look at this.

Medicines were well managed by support workers who administered for one person, whilst the other three people booked out a weeks supply and self-administered. This was part of their objectives for independent living. Staff had received medication training and had been observed as competent.

The service used the recovery star model which identified people’s history, what support they needed and set objectives. People confirmed they were involved in designing and reviewing their star recovery model. Risks to people had been assessed, monitored and reviewed.

The staff team were a strength of this service. People told us support workers were non-judgemental about their situation, this was particularly evident where one person had a relapse. We observed support workers showing kindness, patience and guidance for people as they were becoming more independent. Support workers respected people’s privacy and dignity and people confirmed this always happened.

Staff were supported through a regular programme of supervision and appraisal. The registered manager cared about the welfare of support workers who told us they felt well supported. Support workers received the necessary skills and knowledge through their training programme to provide effective care.

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 were able to choose what they wanted to eat and drink. Access to healthcare was evident through our observations and care records we looked at. People’s religious needs were being met.

People were prevented from becoming socially isolated. They were free to access the local community and records showed people were involved in day centres and other groups.

Regular house and staff meetings were taking place. A satisfaction survey had gone out shortly before our inspection. A system of audits were effective, although we found the operational visit record required improvement.

No complaints had been received since our last inspection. People were happy with the care they received and were complimentary about staff.

Beech Street was last inspected in February 2014. We found it was compliant with all of the regulations we inspected against at that time.

The home is registered to provide accommodation and support for four people aged 18 years and over who experience mental health problems. It is located about a mile from Huddersfield town centre and has good access to local amenities including shops, cafes, and sports facilities. On the day of inspection there were four people living at the home.

The home had 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.

People said they felt safe at Beech Street. Support staff could recognise the signs of abuse and told us they would report it appropriately.

Medicines were managed safely and administered in a person-centred way.

Risks to people were assessed and managed. Checks had been done on the building utilities and facilities to make sure they were safe.

People told us the home was adequately staffed to meet their needs. No new members of staff had been recruited for over 18 months so the staff team was stable.

People told us staff were well trained. Records showed and staff told us they had received the training and support they required to meet people’s needs.

Support workers could describe how they had supported people to make their own decisions in line with legislation. People told us they were independent and could come and go as they pleased.

Records showed and people told us staff supported them to maintain their holistic health. People were encouraged to shop for food and cook their own evening meals.

People told us the staff were caring and knew them well as individuals. We observed people and staff interacting in a relaxed and friendly way.

People told us they had been involved in designing and reviewing their risk assessments and support plans and we saw they had signed them. They also described how staff encouraged them build their independence.

People’s care plans were detailed and person-centred. They were based upon a recovery model which assessed people’s progress towards agreed goals.

People told us they were supported to take part in activities they chose and we saw opportunities were provided for people to socialise with those supported in the provider’s other services.

People and staff told us the registered manager was approachable, supportive and open to new ideas. People and staff had regular meetings where they were asked to feedback about the service.

A comprehensive system of audits was in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service.

We found a safeguarding concern reported to the local authority had not been report to the Care Quality Commission, as is required. The registered manager apologised for the oversight and said she would review reporting procedures at the home.

Our observations of the service showed that care staff spoke with and interacted with people who used the service in a friendly, patient and pleasant manner. Care staff supported people in a sensitive way using differing methods of communication to ensure that people who used the service understood what was expected of them.

There were systems and processes, policies and procedures in place to support the delivery of care. Report writing in the care records reflected the changes in care and treatment that people received. We also found that staff were supported and monitored in their working practice and had training and appraisals programmes in place.

The people who used the service appeared happy and comfortable with their surroundings. They appeared to be relaxed with the staff in their interactions with them. We noted that people who used the service had access to a wide range of activities, which were personalised to their individual needs and documented clearly in the support plans.

We asked one person who used the service how they rated the service they told us they would give it '10 our of 10.'