You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 August 2017

Care service description

Felbrigg House is a privately owned service providing care and support for up to 11 people with different learning disabilities. People may also have behaviours that challenge and communication needs. The service is a detached property close to the centre of Dover. Each person had their own bedroom which contained their own personal belongings and possessions that were important to them. The service had its own vehicle to access facilities in the local area and to access a variety of activities.

Rating at last inspection

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

Rating at this inspection

At this inspection we found the service Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

The registered manager had good oversight of everything that happened at the service. They promoted the ethos of the service which was to give personalised care and support to people. To support them to achieve their full potential and be as independent as possible.

People indicated that they were happy and felt safe. They were settled, contented and relaxed in the company of staff. People were safeguarded from abuse and protected from the risk of harm. Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and knew what action to take in the event of any suspicion of abuse.

Risks to people’s safety were assessed and managed appropriately. Assessments showed how risks could be minimised. People were supported to take risks and not be restricted by them. The staff carried out regular environmental and health and safety checks to ensure that the environment was safe and that equipment was in good working order. There were systems in place to review any accidents and incidents and make any relevant improvements as a result. Emergency plans were in place so if an emergency happened, like a fire, the staff knew what to do.

Before people decided to move into the service their support needs would be assessed by the registered manager to make sure the service would be able to offer them the care that they needed. People indicated that they were satisfied and happy with the care and support they received. People received care that was personal to them. People, and those close to them, were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support. Care plans contained a lot of duplicated information and where cumbersome. Information was difficult to locate. The registered manager was addressing this. This is an area for improvement.

People received their medicines safely and when they needed them. They were monitored for any side effects. People’s medicines were reviewed regularly by their doctor to make sure they were still suitable. If people were unwell or their health was deteriorating the staff contacted their doctors or specialist services.

People were encouraged to access the kitchen whenever they wanted and were able to prepare their own drinks whenever they wished. They were supported to shop for and prepare meals of their choosing. People were encouraged to eat a healthy and nutritious diet.

People’s privacy was respected. They 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 an allocated key worker. Key workers were members of staff who took a key role in co-ordinating a person’s care and support and promoted continuity of support between the staff team. The service was planned around people’s individual preferences and care needs. People were given support in the way they preferred. People had many opportunities to go out and about. People were encouraged to try new experiences and develop new interests to enrich their life and increase their confidence and self-esteem. People’s confidence had developed to enable them to make more choices and decisions themselves and become more independent. People led active lives and they showed us pictures of the things they

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 August 2017

The service remains Good.

Medicines were managed safely.

Risks relating to people’s care and support were assessed and mitigated.

There was enough staff to keep people safe. Staff were recruited safely.

Staff knew how to recognise and respond to abuse.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 August 2017

The service remains Good

Staff received the training and support they needed to carry out their roles effectively.

Staff had an understanding of The Mental Capacity (2005) and people were able to make choices about their lives.

People were supported to prepare and eat a range of nutritious foods.

People were supported to manage their health care needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 August 2017

The service remains Good

Staff had built up strong relationships with people.

People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and make their needs known.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 August 2017

The service remains Good.

People received person-centred care. Care plans were up to date and people participated in a range of activities both in and outside of the service.

People told us they knew how to complain if they needed to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 August 2017

The service remains Good

There was inclusive culture and people were involved in all aspects of the service.

The registered manager was knowledgeable and experienced.

People and relatives were regularly asked for feedback on the service. The registered manager completed a range of checks and audits.