We carried out a review of the data available to us about Ann Mangham 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 Ann Mangham, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Visitors to the home were required to follow a procedure, which included testing negative for COVID-19 beforehand, having their body temperature screened and wearing person protective equipment. Professionals were required to provide evidence of their vaccination status via the NHS app or COVID pass.
Alternatives to visiting in person had been put in place earlier in the pandemic. People had been supported to stay in touch with family and friends. People were safely going out and returning to the home at the time of our inspection. The home had a dedicated private space for visits if people or their relatives desired this.
The provider had managed to prevent an outbreak of COVID-19 in the home throughout the pandemic. Staff understood the protocol to follow if people became symptomatic or tested positive for COVID-19.
People and staff were part of a regular programme of testing for COVID-19 and they had received their vaccinations.
The home had plenty of PPE for staff to wear. Staff had organised split meal times and moved furniture in the home to support social distancing.
Ann Mangham is a residential care setting for up to ten people with mental health needs. Nine people were living at the service at the time of the inspection. The service mainly provides guidance and supervision to promote an independent lifestyle.
Four people are accommodated in an adapted house, one person in another house and four separate furnished flats in the same grounds.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were very settled, and staff clearly knew them very well. Safeguarding concerns were dealt with appropriately and risk assessments showed how staff should support people with their differing needs. Staffing levels were sufficient as most people were independent in everyday living tasks.
Medicines were managed safely, and the premises were kept clean and accessible. Staff were kind and considerate, supporting people to make their own choices. Staff were empathetic, providing reassurance when needed but also encouraging people to think about problems in different ways. External feedback about the service was positive.
People’s needs were assessed well, and any changes noted. As the staff team was stable this helped build knowledge of people’s characteristics and how to support them. People helped themselves to food and drink, and discreet support was offered if needed. Care documentation provided guidance for staff and was audited regularly to ensure it remained reflective of people’s needs.
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. People were very much a part of the local community and lived life to the full.
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 14 June 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.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
One key question was rated ‘Requires Improvement.’ The service had not always ensured the premises was effective for people. At this inspection we found the provider had made improvements in this area.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Why the service is rated Good
People received support if and when they needed this which was individual to their needs, and risks were minimised wherever possible whilst maintain people’s independence. Staff received training and support which helped them be effective in their roles. The deputy on the day of inspection had placed three staff on a first aid course which ensured all staff were up to date with their training. People had maximum choice and control of their own lives. The service provider’s policies and systems were up to date and in place. We observed a relaxed atmosphere in people’s own flats and house, and saw people were free to decide how they spent their time. The deputy and registered manager ensured the quality of the service was monitored, and improvements were made when required.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The inspection took place on the 13 November 2015. The inspection was unannounced. At the last inspection of the home in October 2013 the service was compliant with all of the regulations assessed.
Ann Mangham provides accommodation and support for up to ten people with mental health needs. There were nine people living at the service on the day of the inspection. The service mainly provides guidance and supervision to promote an independent lifestyle.
The home does not need a registered manager as it is run by the registered provider Ann Mangham. 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.
The home had safeguarding policies and procedures in place to support staff and staff told us that they would have no hesitation in raising any concerns regarding people’s safety and welfare. The people we spoke with unanimously told us that they felt safe living at the service.
Risks were identified and recorded in people’s individual care plans and people were supported to take responsible risks. Regular checks were carried out on the premises to ensure that they were safe.
People told us there were sufficient numbers of staff on duty. People spoke highly of the staff and we observed warm, friendly interactions between them. We saw that staff went through a thorough recruitment regime before employment commenced. Recruitment checks were completed before staff commenced employment.
People received their medication safely. They were supported to manage their own medicines where possible.
The home was clean and smelt pleasant. Some minor improvements were agreed with the registered provider to further reduce any risks of infection.
People had an assessment to see whether the home was suitable and people were positive about the care and support they received.
Staff received appropriate induction, training and support to help them in their roles. People told us that staff were skilled in caring for people. Staff told us that training supported them in caring for people effectively.
People were supported to make their own decisions and where they were not able to do so, meetings were held to ensure that decisions were made in the person’s best interests. If it was considered that people were being deprived of their liberty, the correct authorisations had been applied for. Their consent was sought regarding all aspects of their care.
People told us that they enjoyed the food and that their likes and dislikes were considered.
People were supported to attend health appointments and appropriate referrals were made where people required support with any aspect of their health. Information regarding people’s health and welfare was recorded in their care records.
The home was individually furnished and decorated. People personalised their rooms to make them more homely. However we found that the garage which was being used as a gym and a laundry had a hole in the floor and this room had not been decorated or risk assessed to ensure it was safe for people to use.
People consistently told us they were well cared for and said they were treated with dignity and respect and we observed this throughout our visit. People were encouraged to be independent and we saw people come and go throughout the day. People chose how to spend their time. People told us their views and opinions were sought and we saw that advocacy was accessed where someone required support with this. This helped to ensure that people’s views and opinions could be taken into account.
People told us that the service responded to their needs. People’s care needs were reviewed and records maintained. People had detailed care plans which recorded how they wanted to be cared for. It was not always evident that people were signing their agreement to any changes in care.
People told us they could choose how to spend their time. We observed people choosing what they wanted to do and where they wanted to go. Eight of the people living at the service went out independently. There were few structured activities or groups taking place however people told us that they were happy with the way they spent their time.
People told us they were able to complain and raise any issues with the staff or management.
People spoke positively of the staff and management and it was evident that people living at the service knew the registered provider and staff well.
People’s views and opinions were sought and the deputy manager had implemented a new quality monitoring system aimed to monitor all aspects of quality at the service. We saw that people’s views and suggestions were responded to.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
'We can do our own thing.'
'The staff are brilliant.'
We spoke with two members of staff who told us people were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. On the day of our inspection we observed people coming and going as they pleased to access the local community. People who used the service told us they felt the staff respected their dignity and privacy.
We looked at two care records, which included assessments and care plans relating to individual needs. The care plans were individualised and contained all the information staff would need to make sure people were supported in the way they preferred.
We looked at the menu planning record which showed choice and variety was offered to people. We saw people helped plan the menu, with guidance from staff about healthy options.
We spoke with the staff on duty who told us they enjoyed working at the home and felt supported by the management. Staff said they were provided with regular training, one to one supervision meetings and annual appraisal.
The provider had a complaints policy and procedure available for people who used the service. People told us they knew how to raise a complaint and that there was a form accessible on the notice board in the dining area. People's complaints were investigated and resolved, where possible, to their satisfaction.
.People using the service told us that they feel supported to live their lives how they want and said that the staff and their own families help them. One person said moving to Whiteley House is the best thing they had ever done. They went on to say that they love their own house and taking their dog for a walk and working in the allotment. They also said they have had problems in the past but like being part of the community and living an ordinary life.
People told us they like the care and support that is provided. One person said people are great and they help them to do things. Another said its like one big happy family and everyone seems to get on with each other.
People told us they like the people looking after them and supporting them. One person said that they didn't know what they would do without support workers help. Another said staff are great but likes some better than others.
People told us that they like living in the home and that they feel safe. One person said they like the people supporting them and if they have any problems they can talk to staff and they are sorted out.
People using the service told us that they like living at Whiteley House. One person said they like their home and it's the best thing that has ever happened to them. Another person says they are fully involved in their care plans and reviews and they have a say in what happens to them and how they are supported. Another says they like being able to go out and enjoy going to the allotment and doing some gardening.