We carried out a review of the data available to us about Moorpine 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 Moorpine, you can give feedback on this service.
Moorpine is a care home providing personal care for up to three people with a learning disability. Two people were using the service at the time of the inspection.
The service has been developed and designed 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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Family members told us the service was safe. Appropriate safeguarding procedures were in place and staff had been trained in how to protect people from abuse. Risks were well managed and the provider learned from accidents and incidents. Systems were in place for the safe storage, administration and recording of medicines.
People were supported with their healthcare needs and had access to healthcare professionals when required. 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.
Family members told us staff were kind and treated people with respect. People were given information in a way they could understand. Staff included people and their family members in the care planning process and their preferences and choices were clearly documented.
Staff protected people from social isolation. People were provided with the opportunity to take part in activities that were relevant and important to them. Family members did not have any complaints about the service.
There were good links with the local community. The provider monitored the quality of the service to make sure they delivered a high standard of care. They carried out self-evaluations and analysis to identify improvements to make positive changes for the people they supported.
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 19 September 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 in June 2015 we had rated the service as Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good and met each of the fundamental standards we inspected.
Some people were unable to tell us about the service because of their complex needs. People appeared content and relaxed with the staff who supported them. Relatives told us they were satisfied with the service provided by Moorpine staff. Staff knew the people they were supporting well and there were enough staff on duty to provide individual care to people. Detailed records accurately reflected the care provided by staff.
Risk assessments identified current risks to the person as well as ways for staff to minimise or appropriately manage those risks. People were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible, and staff worked to help people learn new skills.
People were protected as staff had received training about safeguarding and knew how to respond to any allegation of abuse. Staff received other appropriate training and they were supervised and supported. When new staff were appointed, thorough vetting checks were carried out to make sure they were suitable to work with people who needed care and support.
Staff upheld people's human rights and treated everyone with great respect and dignity. Every effort was made to help people communicate their needs and wishes, including the use of communication technology, so that care could be tailored to the individual person.
People were involved in decisions about their daily care requirements. 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 had access to health care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment. Staff followed advice given by professionals to make sure people received the care they needed. Systems were in place for people to receive their medicines in a safe way. However, no one was in receipt of medicines at the time of inspection. People were encouraged to maintain a healthy diet.
People were empowered to make meaningful decisions about how they lived their lives. People were encouraged and supported to go out and engage with the local community and maintain relationships that were important to them.
Relatives and staff spoke well of the registered manager and they said the service had good leadership. There were effective systems to enable people to raise complaints, and to assess and monitor the quality of the service. People told us they would feel confident to speak to staff about any concerns if they needed to. The provider undertook a range of audits to check on the quality of care provided. These methods included feedback from people receiving care.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection took place on 11 June 2015. The last inspection of this home was carried out on 9 July 2013. The service met the regulations we inspected against at that time.
Moorpine provides care and support for three people who have autism spectrum condition. The care home is a detached family house in a residential area near the city centre. The service is situated beside two similar small care homes and all three services are managed by the same registered manager.
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 people who lived at the home had complex needs that meant they were unable to express their views. Relatives made positive comments about the service. They described the service as safe and said people felt “settled” at the home. Relatives felt included in decisions about their family member’s care. Staff were clear about how to recognise and report any suspicions of abuse. Any concerns had been investigated to make sure people were protected.
Medicines were managed in the right way, but a recent change in medicines records had led to some recording errors which meant staff needed more instruction in this. There were enough staff employed to make sure people had one-to-one support when they needed it. There had been a few changes to staff members to create a better mix of skills and experience. Relatives said they would like more information about staff changes in the future. In most areas the premises were safe, comfortable and well decorated. However the bathroom had a split in the flooring and the shower tray base was cracked, which presented health and safety hazards for the people who lived here. These were addressed shortly after the inspection visit.
Relatives told us they had confidence in the way people’s needs were met by the service. One relative commented, “My [family member] requires a high level and very complex level of support and we are appreciative of the efforts that the organisation make towards this for him and the other residents.”
Relatives also felt staff were competent and supported to provide the specialist service to meet their family member’s needs. Staff were well trained in supporting people with autism. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for people who lacked capacity to make a decision and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards to make sure any restrictions were in people’s best interests. For example all of the people who lived there needed staff support and supervision when out in the community because they had little understanding of road safety.
People were supported to enjoy an active lifestyle that included healthy diets which met their individual preferences. They were encouraged to be involved in shopping, choosing and preparing meals.
Relatives felt staff understood each person and supported them in a way that met their specific needs. They felt fully involved in reviews about their family member’s care. Relatives told us they felt people were well cared for in the home. Each person had a range of social and vocational activities they could take part in. People’s choice about whether to engage in these activities was respected.
Relatives were invited to comment on the service in an informal way and they felt able to give their views about the home at any time. The results of previous annual satisfaction questionnaires had not been collated so they had not been shared with relatives and other relevant agencies, but this was going to be done in the future. People and relatives had some information about how to make a complaint, although this did not contain contact details about who to complain to. However relatives said they were confident that any issues would be looked into.
Relatives and staff felt the organisation was well run and the home was well managed. One relative commented, “The people in the organisation care about the people who use its service. They are very willing and understand people’s needs.” There was an open, approachable and positive culture within the home and in the organisation.
We spent some time in the house, and observed how staff supported them. We saw that staff encouraged people to make their own choices and decisions. We saw that staff treated people with dignity and respected their diverse needs.
We spoke with the parents of one person for their views about the service. They made many positive comments about Moorpine. They told us, 'We are very happy with the service and what they help him to do.'
People had lots of opportunities to go out to activities they enjoyed. We saw care staff supported each person with their specific individual needs while respecting their dignity and choices. People enjoyed a varied diet and the home helped people with their nutritional needs.
We saw the provider had improved the way that essential staff training was managed and recorded.
We saw the provider checked the quality of the service, and asked people and their relatives for their views. The home had a complaints procedure and people were encouraged to show if they did not like something.
We visited the home and spoke with the manager and deputy manager. We looked at the 'Learning and Development' files of four staff. We also looked at a training management plan that showed when staff should have updated, refresher training.
We found some areas of refresher training were out of date, there were gaps in the mandatory training of a small number of staff, and training records were inaccurate.
The three young men who lived at Moorpine had complex needs that limited their communication and verbal skills. This meant they could not tell us their views about the service.
We spent some time with people during a teatime meal and observed how staff supported them. We saw that staff encouraged people to make their own choices and decisions. We saw that staff treated people with dignity and respected their diverse needs.
We saw that relatives had completed an annual satisfaction survey in June 2011 which showed they thought people at the home felt 'safe and secure'. Relatives had also commented that 'staff treat people fairly and with respect.'
We saw that people's bedrooms were decorated and furnished to suit their individual lifestyle and choices. We saw that people made good use of all areas of the house as they wished.
We saw records of tickbox surveys that people had completed. These showed us that people liked the facilities at the home, including their accommodation, activities and menus.
Relatives had made positive comments about the 'friendly' staff in a satisfaction survey by the provider. One relative wrote, 'I know that all the carers are extremely competent at their jobs.'
We saw records of the monthly Residents' Meetings which showed people
were encouraged and supported to make suggestions about their home and the service they received.