Background to this inspection
Updated
6 February 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.
Service and service type
Mayfield Adult Services 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.
This service also provides care and support to people living in a ‘supported living’ setting, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because the service is small and people are often out and we wanted to be sure there would be people at home to speak with us.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with three people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with five members of staff including the registered manager, team leaders and care workers. We spent time observing people’s interaction with staff and one another.
We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We spoke to one person’s relative about their experience of the care provided.
We spoke to two health and social care professionals.
Updated
6 February 2020
About the service
Mayfield Adult Services is a residential care home and supported living service providing personal care to five people living with a learning disability at the time of the inspection. Three people lived in the residential care home and two in supported living. The service can support up to four people at the residential care home.
The supported living service was one house with shared lounge and kitchen. There were three bedrooms, with two people living there at the time of the inspection.
The care home accommodates up to four people in one adapted building.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
The service was located with other homes run by the provider, in a campus style and a rural location. This is not in line with current best practice guidance. However, the impact of the rural location was mitigated as staff ensured people accessed the community regularly. Due to the service being located with other homes, in the campus style, the home appeared large. However, its style was in keeping with other local properties. Staff wore their own clothes when supporting people so as not to draw attention to the property being a care home.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion, as far as possible. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
People were safe and protected from abuse by staff who understood safeguarding and how to respond to any concerns. Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were assessed and mitigated. Staff had a positive approach to risk, to ensure people lived full lives. There were enough staff available to support people. People were supported to take their medicines safely. Infection control was well managed. When things went wrong, lessons were learnt.
People’s needs were holistically assessed and planned for in-line with evidence-based guidance. Staff were supported with induction, training and regular supervision. Staff had specialist training to meet the needs of people. People were supported to eat a healthy balanced diet. Staff worked with other professionals to ensure people’s healthcare needs were met.
People were treated with kindness, care and respect. Emotional support was provided as needed. People were able express their views and make decisions about their day to day support. People’s privacy and dignity were respected. Staff sought to encourage and develop people’s independence.
People received personalised care. Staff knew people well and activities were tailored to their interests and preferences. Staff understood people’s communication needs and used specialist techniques. People felt able to raise any concerns they had and complaints were responded to in a timely way. People’s needs at the end of the lives had been considered.
There was a positive and person-centred culture. Staff were well supported by the registered manager and had positive working relationships with their colleagues. The registered manager understood their responsibilities under the regulations and duty of candour. People, staff and other professionals were involved in the development of the service. Quality assurance processes were used to audit and improve the service. Staff worked in partnership with other agencies and professionals.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 19 January 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.