• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Juniper House

159 Strathmore Avenue, Luton, Bedfordshire, LU1 3QR (01582) 419923

Provided and run by:
Mrs Audrey Greer

All Inspections

5 September 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited Juniper House on 5 September 2013 to check that the compliance actions we took against the provider in June 2013 had been met.

We spoke to the two people who lived there and the registered manager. People had limited verbal communication. Therefore, we were not able to discuss their care with them in depth. We observed positive interactions between them and the registered manager. People smiled and looked happy. They clapped their hands and laughed loudly to show that they were pleased.

We observed one person was being encouraged to take part in an activity of their choice. This enabled them to maintain their independence. The person said 'help me to clean my bedroom.'

We observed personal support was provided behind closed doors away from communal areas of the premises to protect people's privacy and dignity. We observed people had been helped to look clean and well presented.

We found the systems in place to prevent and control the risk of people acquiring a health care associated infection were being followed.

Action had been taken to ensure people were protected against the risks associated with unsafe or unsuitable premises. Records relating to people's care and treatment and other records were accurate and appropriately maintained.

12 June 2013

During a routine inspection

When we visited Juniper House on 12 June 2013 we spoke with the two people who lived there. We also spoke with a staff member, a visiting health care professional and the registered manager.

We found that people who lived at Juniper House had limited verbal communication therefore, we were not able to discuss their care with them in depth. We observed positive interactions between staff and people. People smiled and looked happy. They clapped their hands and laughed loudly to show that they were pleased. We observed there was a relaxed atmosphere in the home. People looked comfortable in staff's company. We heard staff speaking to people in a respectful and caring manner. We observed staff offering people a choice of hot or cold drinks.

A health care professional said, 'People living at Juniper House were provided with good care and staff were responsive to their needs."

We found that the home had systems in place to gain and review consent from people who use the service and acted on them. The system in place to prevent and control the risk of people acquiring a health care associated infection was not being followed. People were not protected against the risks associated with unsafe or unsuitable premises. Records relating to people's care and treatment and other records were not accurate and appropriately maintained.

10 July 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

When we visited Juniper House on 10 July 2012, we found that both of the people who lived there were very happy with the care and support they received. Due to the limited verbal communication of these people it was difficult to discuss their care with them in any depth. Therefore we also used a number of different methods including observations, and talking with staff, to help us understand the experiences of these people.

We observed that people were offered support at a level which encouraged independence and assured that their individual needs were met. All activities for each individual, whether in the home or in the community, were risk assessed to ensure they were appropriately supported and safe.

There was a relaxed atmosphere in the home, and the staff were friendly and professional in their approach, and interacted confidently with people, involving them in decisions about all aspects of their life.

16 March 2012

During a routine inspection

During our visit to Juniper House on 16 March 2012 we met all three of the people living there. One person was in the house when we arrived. They made it clear that they did not want to speak with us. However, we saw that this person got on reasonably well with the staff member on duty, who showed a patient, professional and caring attitude at all times. We met the other two people when they arrived home from their day services. They showed by their body language and facial expressions that they were very happy at this home and got on well with the staff and the manager.

The manager told us that one person would shortly be leaving the home as they did not get on well enough with one of the other people. A lot of staff time was spent with this person, so once the person left the manager felt they would have more time to ensure the service being provided was of high quality and compliant with the regulations.