The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: The Old Rectory

Chewton Hill, Chewton Mendip, Radstock, Avon, BA3 4NQ (01761) 241620

Provided and run by:
Mr Neil Bradbury

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

22 September 2014

During a routine inspection

A single inspector carried out this inspection and spoke with two people who used the service, the registered manager, and three members of staff. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider.

The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

Is the service safe?

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people who used the service. The staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about their roles and demonstrated a good understanding of the individual needs of the people they were supporting. Staff had received training specific to their role which helped them to keep people safe.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. During our inspection we saw evidence that people had been assessed in accordance with these safeguards in line with procedures and we found the provider was compliant. The registered manager demonstrated an in-depth knowledge of the safeguards which showed us they understood their responsibilities to the people who used the service.

Is the service effective?

One person who used the service told us "The staff are good and very kind. My key worker takes me to the shops and I can talk to them about anything". Staff told us "We help to empower people" and "We change people's lives for the better and it's brilliant to see the changes".

Care records we saw were generally well documented and up to date. Support plans were in-depth but had not always been reviewed and updated to reflect when people's needs changed. Daily diary records were up to date and well written.

Is the service caring?

We observed staff playing, talking and dancing with people. People who used the service were laughing and were relaxed around the staff. Staff we saw were kind to people and treated them with respect. Staff told us "We care about each other" and "It's like a family here".

Is the service responsive?

Support plans showed that people's likes and dislikes had been documented. Positive behaviour support plans were in place. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

People had access to support services when required. Staff supported people when required.

Is the service well-led?

Staff told us they enjoyed working at The Old Rectory. They told us they felt well supported and listened to.

There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of services provided. People and their representatives were regularly asked for their feedback on the service they received.

14 October 2013

During a routine inspection

People were encouraged and supported to make decisions about their day to day lives. One person said 'I talk to the staff about things. They do listen to me. They help me to sort things out.' Two people accessed independent advocacy services.

People said they were very well cared for and that staff were available when they needed them. One person said "I do like it here. I get on well with the staff.' Another person told us the home was 'good' and that the 'staff are good.' They were supported by a wide range of health and social care professionals. Any advice or guidance they gave was acted upon and incorporated into care plans.

Most areas of the home had been redecorated and refurbished. This meant that people were provided with a safe and homely environment to live in.

There were safe and effective recruitment and selection processes in place. Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work which ensured people were protected from the risk of being cared for by unsuitable staff.

People were made aware of the complaints system. This was provided in a format that met their needs. People's concerns and complaints were fully investigated and resolved, where possible, to their satisfaction.

12 March 2013

During a routine inspection

People who lived in the home were well cared for. They made decisions about their day to day lives and about the care and support provided to them. One person said 'I choose what I want to do. The staff are nice people. They always listen to you.'

People chose what activities they wished to take part in both inside and out of the home. They were supported to access a range of educational, social and leisure activities, outings and holidays. Some people accessed the community without staff support.

They were encouraged to be independent. Two people were planning to move to less supported environments due to the success of their stay here. One person told us 'I'm pretty independent. I go out on my own, catch the bus to visit friends and look after my own money. I'm moving to supported living. I'm looking forward to it.'

People told us they felt safe living in the home. They knew who to speak to if they were worried or upset. One person said "If I was unhappy I would talk to my social worker or my key staff here."

They said they liked the staff who supported them and staff understood what care and support they needed. One person said "The staff are alright here. There are no staff I don't like. I get on with all of them."

The provider had effective systems in place designed to monitor the quality of the service provided to people and to ensure people were safe.

People were not provided with a homely environment which promoted their wellbeing.

17 November 2011

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This inspection was to follow up on areas we had highlighted as concerns at an inspection that we carried out on 17 February 2011.

On the day of this inspection the majority of people who lived in the home were out. We spoke with one person during our visit and four members of staff. We spent the remainder of the time reading some of the home's records and three people's care plans and risk assessments. We also looked around the home.

One person told us they were happy with the care and support they received. They told us about various activities they did and said that they were doing recycling of domestic waste that day which they enjoyed. They told us that staff discussed their care and support with them. They also said they had regular one to one meetings with their key worker where their care was discussed with them.

17, 25 February 2011

During a routine inspection

Many of the people living in the home are unable to communicate verbally. Some people, that were able, told us they liked living at the home. They said staff members were very supportive, kind and caring. We observed this during a visit to the home. People that were able told us that they felt there was enough staff on duty to meet their needs. Some said that the home can get very busy at times, especially if someone requires extra support.

Some people told us that they felt they had lots of opportunities to express their views and be involved in decisions about their lives. They told us about self-advocacy sessions that take place regularly. We were told these sessions encourage them to express their views and be supported to make decisions. Some people told us they were provided with a complaint's procedure and felt confident that if they raised any concerns or complaints it would be dealt with properly.

Some people also told us that staff members support them to attend appointments, such as dentist, chiropody, hospital and GPs. People told us that staff take their time explaining what the appointment is for and help them to understand the outcome.

Some people living in the home told us they found the home comfortable and liked their bedrooms. We looked around the home and found bedrooms were decorated and furnished to people's individual tastes and preferences. All rooms have en-suite facilities. We were told by members of staff that many people living in the home will go into other people's bedrooms and destroy their belongings. Due to this, people's bedrooms are kept locked during the day. Some people have their own keys but those unable to use a key can only have access to their rooms if staff members unlock the door for them. There was no evidence to show that advice had been sought about considering other locking systems that may enable people to have access to their bedrooms without having to ask members of staff.

Some people living in the home told us they found it frustrating that they could not use some rooms in the home without staff being present because the rooms were kept locked. Examples of this were the dining room, training kitchen and the art room. We were told by members of staff that many people living in the home have behaviours that are 'challenging' that sometimes leads to aggressive outbursts. We were told the art room has to be locked as some people may use items in the art room as 'weapons'. We asked what would happen if the 'weapons' were locked away and the art room was left open, to enable people to have access and therefore have more space, staff were unsure. The lounge is the only room that is not locked. This means that if there is an aggressive outburst around the lounge area, there is nowhere for people to go. The home has risk assessments and a locked door policy in place about these areas. These do not show that the home has considered removing any risks within a room and leaving the door unlocked, rather than just keeping the room locked.

Some people, that were able, told us they did not like it when there was aggression in the home. They said that staff tried hard to ensure everyone was protected but it was still 'unpleasant'.

Some people told us they are able to access the community independently. They said they enjoyed going to the shops and using public transport on their own. Some people told us they attended a variety of activities with the support of staff, examples ranged from college courses, shopping, farm activities at another home operated by the same provider and pub outings.

People that were able told us they enjoyed the food that was provided by the home. They said the cook was 'wonderful'. They said they are able to have a choice of meals and are able to tell the cook their likes and dislikes.

Most people living in the home cannot manage their medication independently. One person told us they managed their medication themselves and kept it in their bedroom within their flat. This medication was kept in a bedside cabinet drawer. There was no locking system for this drawer. The flat is kept locked most of the time when the person is out. However, if it was ever unlocked, there is a risk that someone could enter the bedroom and gain access to the medication.