Coopers Mill

Updated 22 November 2019

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 completed by one inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Coopers Mill 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.

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

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

Prior to the inspection we sought feedback from provider agencies including the local authority and learning disability team. We reviewed the information we held about the service and looked at any information held in the public domain.

The provider did not complete the required Provider Information Return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about the service, what it does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account in making our judgements in this report.

We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection-

We looked at four electronic care plans and reviewed paper copies for three others. We spoke with eight people living in the home, some only briefly and spoke with nine staff. We looked at records used to administer people’s medicines and documents the management team used to monitor the service provided. We looked in all areas of the home including the communal areas and people’s living accommodation.

After the inspection

Following the inspection the provider sent us documents for audit they were developing at the time of the inspection. This allowed us to evidence the procedures for the governance and oversight of the service had been developed.

Updated 22 November 2019

About the service

Coopers Mill is a residential care home supporting people living with a learning disability. The home is separated into three distinct areas including a large main house which supports eight people in their own rooms, a bungalow supporting four people and four two bedroomed flats, each supporting two people. The home can support up to 20 people and at the time of the inspection 20 people were living in the home.

The service was developed, and whilst not intentional was 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 main house was much larger than a domestic style property and was set in its own grounds. The bungalow had been built to the side of the main house and they were joined by a kitchen. The flats were to the rear of the main house and shared a large landscaped garden. The home supported 20 people over the three buildings which is more than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We were told by people, they were always safe and well cared for by the staff supporting them. Staff showed a good understanding of safeguarding and how to recognise and report any signs of abuse. Risk assessments were completed to ensure risks to both the individual and environment were mitigated wherever possible. There were enough safely recruited and qualified staff to keep people safe and they were competent in the administration of people’s medicines. We found the home was clean and all staff had appropriate equipment to reduce the risk of infection.

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 were being updated to support this practice. The service had unintentional but accurately applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

Staff received good training and were supported to gain focused qualifications. People had choices in how, when and what they ate and staff encouraged healthy eating. The provider worked with relevant professionals to ensure people’s needs were met.

People’s autonomy and independence was respected, they were involved in both developing their care and support and influenced the running of the home and grounds. People’s views and choices were respected and where required specific support was provided by advocacy services. People were constantly asked for feedback. Relationships between staff and people living in the home were positive, friendly and relaxed.

Each person was provided with support they had chosen. The design of the service allowed people to experience independence where possible. Activities were led by the individual with people having volunteer jobs in the community or helping with the grounds on site.

Everyone was happy in their role on the staff team and we saw good peer support. The service was reviewed regularly by way of surveys and questionnaires and regular monitoring of the service was completed. The provider engaged well with the inspection and responded immediately to any areas which could be improved. The previous report rating was displayed around the home and the provider communicated any areas of concern with the care quality commission as required.

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 (22 November 2016).

The service remains rated as Good.

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.