We carried out a review of the data available to us about Yewbank 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 Yewbank, you can give feedback on this service.
Yewbank is a care home (without nursing) which is registered to provide a service for up to five people with learning disabilities. People had other associated difficulties such as being on the autistic spectrum.
People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
Yewbank accommodates people in a purpose built domestic sized building. The service was run in line with the values that underpin the ‘’registering the right support’’ and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism can lead as ordinary a life as any citizen.
At the last inspection, on 21 December 2015, the service was rated as good in all domains. This meant that the service was rated as overall good. At this inspection we found the service remained good in all domains and the service remained overall good.
Why the service is rated good.
There is a registered manager running the service. 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.
Staff understood how to protect the people in their care from all forms of abuse. They were trained in safeguarding people and knew what action to take if they identified any concerns. General risks and risks to individuals were identified and appropriate action was taken to reduce them, as far as possible. Additionally peoples', staff and visitors safety was taken seriously and actions were taken to assist people to remain as safe as possible.
People continued to be supported by adequate staffing ratios. These met people’s specific needs, including any special needs, safely. Recruitment systems were in place to make sure, that as far as possible, staff recruited were safe and suitable to work with people. People were supported to take their medicines, at the right times and in the right amounts by trained and competent staff.
People’s varied and diverse needs were met by a well-trained and knowledgeable staff team. Staff dealt effectively with people’s current and changing health and emotional well-being needs. The service worked closely with health and other professionals to ensure they were able to meet people’s needs in the most effective and comfortable way for the individual.
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 supported by a caring and committed staff team who continued to meet people’s needs with kindness and respect. They ensured they promoted people’s privacy and dignity and communicated with them effectively.
The service remained person centred and responsive to people’s needs, wishes and aspirations. Activity programmes were designed to meet people’s individual preferences, choices and aspirations. Care planning was highly individualised and regularly reviewed which ensured people’s current needs were met and their equality and diversity was respected.
The registered manager was well liked and respected. She and the management team ensured the service continued to be well-led. She was described as approachable and very supportive. The registered manager and the staff team were committed to ensuring that discrimination in any form was not tolerated.The quality of care the service provided was constantly assessed, reviewed and improved.
The inspection took place on 21 December 2015 and was announced. Due to its small size, the service was given a 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. We needed to make sure that the registered manager would be available and that people who use the service could be contacted in person. The service had last been inspected in November 2013. The service was meeting the regulations at that time.
Yewbank is one of eight separate residential care homes within Purley Park Trust Estate. Yewbank provides personal care and support for up to five people with learning disabilities and associated conditions, such as autistic spectrum disorders.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 told us they felt safe at Yewbank, and their relatives were also sure of their security. Staff knew the correct procedures to follow if they considered someone was at risk of harm or abuse. They had received appropriate safeguarding training and there were policies and procedures in place to follow in case of an allegation of abuse.
Medicines were stored and administered safely. Staff and people who used the service were aware of what medicines were to be taken and when. Risks were assessed and managed so that people could be supported to live their lives actively and safely.
People’s health and well-being were kept under review and staff liaised closely with health and social care professionals to ensure people received all the support they needed.
People were supported by a stable and very caring staff team who knew them well. The number of staff was sufficient to meet people’s various needs. People were supported to access the community and enjoy trips out and other activities when they wanted.
Procedures in relation to recruitment and retention of staff were robust and ensured only suitable people were employed in the service.
The staff team understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and were able to explain how people's capacity had been assessed and how they supported them in line with this. They were aware of the principles of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and this had been applied within the home to protect people's human rights.
Care plans were informative and contained clear guidance for staff. They included information about people’s routines, personal histories, preferences and any situations which might excite their anxiety or stress. They clearly described how staff could support people in these circumstances.
People were encouraged to make decisions about their meals and they participated in menu planning. They were also supported to go shopping. We saw people were involved in and consulted about all aspects of their care and support. This included suggestions for activities and holidays.
People were provided with a range of activities which met their individual needs and interests. Individuals were also supported to maintain relationships with their relatives and friends.
People and those who were important to them knew how to raise concerns and make complaints. Complaints were recorded, investigated and the outcome was fed back to the complainant.
There was an open and inclusive atmosphere in the service; and the registered manager showed effective leadership. People at the service, their relatives and staff were provided with opportunities to make their wishes known and to have their voice heard. Staff spoke positively about how the registered manager worked with them and encouraged team working.
Quality assurance systems were in place, gathering people’s and their relatives’ views about the service. Regular audits were carried out to help ensure the service was running effectively and safely.
People told us that they really liked the staff. One said 'they are great; they make sure we are happy because this is our home'. They talked to us about their activities and their holidays. One person told us how they had a friend come to lunch each week. Another told us about going out to buy lunch for everyone. We saw that all the people living in Yewbank got along well and it was clear that staff members knew the people living in the house well.
People were offered choices and encouraged to make decisions. They appeared happy and relaxed and we saw that they were spoken to with respect.
The care and support plans gave staff guidance on how to support people in each aspect of their life. We found that all records were accurate. They were held securely and destroyed in line with the provider's policy
People were protected from the risk of inadequate nutrition. They were involved in choosing what they ate and drank. Staff supported them to make healthy choices.
Medications were ordered, handled and stored appropriately. There were processes in place to ensure they were safely administered.
We saw that people were involved in what happened in the house and that they were offered choices and their decisions were respected. We saw that they were referred to by their preferred name and treated with dignity. We saw that the care and support offered to the people living in Yewbank reflected what was recorded in their support plans.
Staff members had all completed the necessary training as determined by the provider. We saw that this included safeguarding. The people we spoke with who lived in Yewbank told us they were happy living in the house.
There was a clear complaints policy and staff members made sure that everyone knew what to do if they wanted to make a complaint.
People who were able to verbally communicate with us told us that they were treated with respect by staff. They told us they were involved in the decisions made about their care. They told us that they had no concerns or worries about the care they received. People said that they were kept fully informed about their care and could approach staff if they were worried or concerned.