You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

About the service: 199a -203a Salthouse Road is a care home providing personal care for up to eight people who have a learning disability and/or autism. At the time of our inspection seven people lived at the service.

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:

We received positive views from relatives about the support provided to people. We observed people and staff had developed good and caring relationships built on trust and mutual respect.

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used some restrictive intervention practices as a last resort, in a person-centred way, in line with positive behaviour support principles.

People were safeguarded from harm by staff who had received the relevant training. Risks to people's safety were assessed and clear guidance was in place to explain to staff how to mitigate any known risk.

People were supported by staff who had been recruited following safe recruitment procedures. People received their medicine on time and were protected from the risk of infection. Accident and incident forms were completed, and lessons were learnt when things went wrong. People's care needs were assessed, and staff received training that enabled them to meet people's needs.

People were supported to maintain a balanced diet and had access to fluids and snacks. Where required, staff monitored people’s weights and worked with healthcare professionals to make sure people received medical attention when required. Systems were in place to ensure information was shared when necessary. For example, when accessing health care.

The building was adapted to meet people's needs and people had access to outside space.

People were treated with kindness and supported to express their opinion wherever possible. The service was working with professionals who were providing specialist training in communication for the staff team to promote effective communication within the service. People's dignity was protected, and people were encouraged to maintain their independence.

People's care was personalised to their individual needs and people had access to activities they were known to enjoy. Staff used alternative means of communication such as photographs to assist people in the exchange of information. People were supported to maintain relationships and attend family events.

Relatives and staff spoke positively about the registered manager. They felt able to raise concerns and were confident these would be addressed. Staff told us they were well supported by the registered manager and senior management team. A complaints procedure was in place.

No one was in receipt of end of life care however, staff had previous experience of supportin

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was well led.

Details are in our well led findings below.