Archived: Dainton House

Updated 24 September 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection was carried out by two inspectors on 18 August 2015 and was unannounced. One of the inspectors had experience of issues relating to mental health.

Before the inspection we received information from external professionals involved with the service. We reviewed information we held about the service, this included notifications of significant events that had taken place since the last inspection.

During our inspection we spoke with three people who lived at the home. We also talked with two members of staff, the manager and the clinical director.

We looked at various records that related to people’s care, staffing and the overall management of the service. These included three care plans, three staff files, and other records relating to the management of the service, such as medicines administration record (MAR) sheets and staff training and induction records.

Updated 24 September 2015

This inspection took place on 18 August 2015 and was unannounced. At the home’s last inspection on 12 January 2015 we found the provider was meeting the legal requirements we checked.

Dainton House is a service run by the charity Community Housing and Therapy. It provides a residential resource for up to 12 adults with mental health needs and associated complex needs including drug and alcohol related issues. The service is run as a therapeutic community providing support in the form of therapeutic groups and meetings aimed at preparing people to move on to more independent accommodation. At the time of our inspection nine people were living at Dainton House.

The home is owned by a charitable organisation. The service did not have a registered manager at the time of the inspection. 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 provider ensured only suitably recruited staff were employed by completing a number of checks prior to them starting work. Once employed staff undertook a comprehensive induction programme, including shadowing more experienced workers. Staff received sufficient training to undertake their role. This training was regularly refreshed so it was in line with current best practice. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people.

People were supported to maintain good health. This included them having access to healthcare professionals, having their medicines as prescribed and sufficient amounts to eat and drink to meet their nutritional needs.

Care was provided with people’s consent. The registered provider understood when mental health legislation was required in order to keep people safe and when a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisation application should be made. This helped to ensure people were safeguarded as legislation required. DoLS provides a process to make sure that people are only deprived of their liberty in a safe and correct way, when it is in their best interests and there is no other way to look after them.

Care plans had been developed for each person using the service which reflected their specific needs and preferences for how they were cared for and supported. People were appropriately supported by staff to make decisions about their care and support needs. These were discussed and reviewed with them regularly.

People said they were happy living at Dainton House. People told us staff looked after them in a respectful way. People said they felt able to raise any issues they had with the manager or other staff and these were taken seriously. There were other numerous ways people could comment on the service.

Where risks to people had been identified there was guidance for staff on how to minimise these in order to keep people safe from injury or harm in the home and wider community. Accidents and incidents were monitored to consider any learning that could take place to prevent re-occurrences.

Staff told us they were supported by their managers through one to one supervision sessions and other meetings where they could consider their professional development.

The service offered a range of therapeutic groups and activities in line with the provider’s ethos of moving people towards independence. People retained a choice of whether they wanted to be involved or not.

There were effective systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service provided and to take action where shortfalls were identified. The registered provider had a clear understanding of their legal responsibilities with regard to safeguarding adults at risk and notifying the CQC of significant events.