Chapel View is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Chapel View can accommodate up to three people who have a learning disability and autism. At the time of our inspection two people were living there. People had their own bedrooms and shared a shower and bathroom. They shared two lounges and a kitchen/dining room. Grounds around the property were accessible. Chapel View had been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support, Building the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service lived as ordinary a life as any citizen.
This inspection took place on 24 October 2018. At the last comprehensive inspection in March 2016 the service was rated as Good overall. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
A registered manager was in post who had been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in 2010. 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’s care and support was person centred. They had been supported by a core group of staff for some time, providing them with consistency and continuity of care. They had positive relationships with staff, who understood them well, anticipating what would make them anxious or uncertain. People were involved in the planning and review of their care and support. They discussed their needs, any risks and concerns with staff. Risks were well managed promoting people’s independence. Staff knew how to keep people safe and how to raise safeguarding concerns. There were enough staff to meet their needs. Satisfactory recruitment processes were in place.
People made choices about their day to day lives. 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. They chose the activities they wish to take part in. They said they liked to take part in football, cricket and rugby. They had voluntary jobs and one person had paid employment. People kept in touch with those important to them. They were supported to visit relatives and meet friends at social clubs or join them in activities. People told us, “Staff are really good” and “A brilliant staff team. They support us 110%.”
People were supported to stay healthy and well. They planned their weekly menu. They prepared their own drinks and lunches. They liked to go out to a local café and pub. People had access to a range of health care professionals. They had annual health checks. People managed their medicines. Staff support was available when needed and medicine audits monitored whether medicines were being taken safely. People had access to easy to read information which used pictures and photographs to explain the text. Staff understood how they preferred to communicate encouraging them to express themselves in the way they found most comfortable.
People’s views were sought to monitor the quality of the service provided. They were confident raising concerns and making a formal complaint. People, their relatives and staff were invited to give feedback through quality assurance surveys. The registered manager and provider completed a range of quality assurance audits to monitor and assess people’s experience of the service. Any actions identified for improvement were monitored to ensure they had been carried out. The registered manager worked closely with local organisations and agencies and national organisations to keep up to date with current best practice and guidance.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.