We carried out a review of the data available to us about Redmond House 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 Redmond House, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
People, staff and visitors were protected again the spread of COVID-19. The provider carried out regular testing and screening procedures to ensure visitors could safely visit. The registered manager maintained contact with relatives and kept them updated on any changes.
The environment appeared clean and had no odours. High touch areas and room cleaning schedules were in place and completed daily. The disposal of personal protective equipment (PPE) followed government guidance and best practice.
Staff wore appropriate PPE and PPE stations including hand sanitiser were placed throughout the home. All staff received infection prevention and control (IPC) and donning and doffing training.
Risk assessments were in place for people and staff regarding individual risk factors of COVID-19. Staff and people were regularly tested and had received COVID-19 vaccinations.
The registered manager and senior staff completed regular audits to ensure oversight of infection prevention and control practices. The provider ensured the service was kept up to date with the latest government guidance.
At the last inspection in December 2015 this service was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.
The service had a 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.
People received care from staff that knew them and were kind, compassionate and respectful. There was sufficient staff to provide the care and support to people that they required.
People’s needs were assessed prior to coming to the home and detailed person-centred care plans were in place and were kept under review. Risks to people had been identified and measures put in place to mitigate any risk.
There were appropriate recruitment processes in place and people felt safe in the home. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from any risk or harm and knew how to respond if they had any concerns.
Staff were supported through regular supervisions and undertook training which helped them to understand the needs of the people they were supporting. People and where appropriate their relatives were involved in decisions about the way in which their care and support was provided.
Staff understood the need to undertake specific assessments where people lacked capacity to consent to their care and / or their day to day routines. People’s health care and nutritional needs were carefully considered and relevant health care professionals were appropriately involved in people’s care.
People were cared for by staff who were respectful of their dignity and who demonstrated an understanding of each person’s needs. Relatives spoke positively about the care their relative received and felt that they could approach management and staff to discuss any issues or concerns they had.
There were comprehensive systems in place to monitor the quality and standard of the home. Regular audits were undertaken and any shortfalls addressed.
The registered manager was approachable and people felt confident that any issues or concerns raised would be addressed and appropriate action taken.
The service strived to remain up to date with legislation and best practice and worked with outside agencies to continuously look at ways to improve the experience for people.
We made a recommendation about ensuring the garden was accessible to people using the service.
This unannounced inspection took place on 17 November 2015. Redmond House provides accommodation for up to 12 people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection nine people were living at the home. Redmond House provides care to younger people with a learning disability and some people have physical health needs.
At our last inspection in December 2014 we asked the provider to make improvements on identifying risks for people using the service and staffing levels at the home. At this inspection we saw that these improvements had been completed.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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 demonstrated that they felt safe in their own home. Staff understood the need to protect people from harm and abuse and knew what action they should take if they had any concerns. Staffing levels ensured that people received the support they required at the times they needed. We observed that on the day of our inspection there were sufficient staff to meet the needs of the people they were supporting. The recruitment practice protected people from being cared for by staff that were unsuitable to work at the home.
Care records contained risk assessments and risk management plans to protect people from identified risks and help to keep them safe but also enabling positive risk taking. They gave information for staff on the identified risk and informed staff on the measures to take to minimise any risks.
People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed. Records showed that medicines were obtained, stored, administered and disposed of safely. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare services when needed.
Staff were highly skilled; plans were in place for new staff to complete the Care Certificate which is based on best practice. The provider’s mandatory training was updated annually.
People were actively involved in decisions about their care and support needs There were formal systems in place to assess people’s capacity for decision making under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People felt safe and there were clear lines of reporting safeguarding concerns to appropriate agencies and staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults.
Care plans were written in a person centred approach and focussed on empowering people; personal choice, ownership for decisions and people being in control of their life. They detailed how people wished to be supported and people and their families were fully involved in making decisions about their care. People participated in a range of activities both in the home and in the community and received the support they needed to help them do this. People were able to choose where they spent their time and what they did.
People had caring relationships with the staff that supported them. Complaints were appropriately investigated and action was taken to make improvements to the service when this was found to be necessary. The manager was accessible and worked alongside care staff to monitor the quality of the service provided. Staff and people were confident that issues would be addressed and that any concerns they had would be listened to.
The registered manager and members of the senior management team of the service were passionate about people receiving person centred care and people and staff being involved and included in decisions about the future.
This unannounced inspection took place on the 16 December 2014.
Redmond House provides accommodation for people requiring personal care. The service can accommodate up to 12 people. At the time of our inspection there were 12 people using the service. Redmond House provides care to younger people with a learning disability and some people have physical health needs.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. 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.
There were not enough staff working at the service and this impacted on the care provided to people.
Medication procedures had been implemented to improve the management of medicines.
There were safeguarding systems in place to protect people from the risk of abuse.
The provider had a recruitment system in place and staff had received a Disclosure and Barring service (DBS) check. The DBS helps an employer make safer recruitment decisions and prevents unsuitable people from being employed.
There was a system of staff training and development in place; however this did not always ensure staff were suitably trained to meet people’s needs.
The registered manager and staff were aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was in the process of submitting DoLS applications to the local authority for people who needed these safeguards.
People received a range of food and drinks. However relatives were concerned diets were not always well-balanced.
People had access to a range of health and social care services. However, sometimes there was a delay in making arrangements for medical appointments.
People’s privacy and dignity was not always respected.
People were not always supported to access the community or undertake activities of their choice.
The provider had a complaints system in place; however relative’s concerns were not always recorded to ensure complaints were dealt with appropriately.
The provider’s system of quality monitoring did not always identify concerns about the service.
There was a lack of formal systems to allow people and their relative’s to feedback about the service.
The management of the home had been through a period of instability and there had been a lack of leadership to ensure good care was provided at the service.
We found a number of breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.