You are here

Archived: Holmside Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 January 2017

Holmside provides accommodation and personal care for up to eight people who have learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. There were eight people living in the home at the time of this inspection.

This inspection visit took place on 27 October 2016 and was announced 24 hours in advance because we wanted to make sure we could meet people who used the service. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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 systems and processes in place to protect people from harm, including how medicines were managed. Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns.

Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home. There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to meet people’s needs.

Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were trained. There was an induction, training and development programme, which supported staff to gain relevant knowledge and skills.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. The providers were aware of their responsibilities and understood when such an application should be made and how to submit one.

People received regular and on-going health checks and support to attend appointments. They were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices about what they ate.

The atmosphere throughout the home was friendly, calm and caring. The staff spoke about people in a respectful manner and demonstrated understanding of their individual needs.

The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what they said. Staff were prompt to raise issues about people’s health and people were referred to health professionals when needed. People were confident they could raise concerns or complaints and that these would be dealt with.

There was an open and inclusive culture within the service, which encouraged people’s involvement and their feedback was used to identify any improvements that were needed. There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate support.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 January 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood their responsibilities.

Risks to people�s individual health and wellbeing were identified and care was planned to minimise the risks.

The provider checked staff�s suitability for their role before they started working at the home.

Medicines were stored, administered and managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 January 2017

The service was effective.

People were cared for and supported by staff who had relevant training and skills.

People�s consent to care and support was sought in line with relevant legislation and guidance. The registered manager understood their legal obligations under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People�s nutritional and dietary needs were taken into account in menu planning and choices.

People were referred to other healthcare services when their health needs changed.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 January 2017

The service was caring.

Staff were kind and compassionate towards people.

Staff knew people well and respected their privacy and dignity.

Staff promoted people�s independence, by encouraging them to make their own decisions.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 January 2017

The service was responsive.

Staff listened to people and were responsive to their needs. They had a good understanding of people�s needs, choices and preferences, and the knowledge to meet people�s individual needs as they changed.

People knew how to complain and were comfortable to raise any concerns about the service they received.

Well-led

Good

Updated 6 January 2017

The service was well led.

Staff received support and felt well informed.

People were encouraged to give their feedback about the service.

The provider played an active role in quality assurance and ensured the service continuously developed and improved.