Archived: Aeolian House

At the time of the provider’s registration, the care service had not been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. However, we found care was provided in line with these values which include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People living with learning disabilities and autism at Aeolian House were supported to live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

People’s experience of using this service:

People received support from staff who were trained and supported to carry out their role. There were enough qualified and skilled staff at the service and staff worked flexibly to meet people’s needs. The provider followed an appropriate recruitment process to employ suitable staff.

Aeolian House was kept clean and health and safety checks were carried out to make sure people lived in a safe environment.

People were protected from harm or injury. Systems for managing incidents, staff and care practices were used to achieve this. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns they had about people’s care and welfare and how to protect them from abuse.

People were supported to be healthy and their healthcare needs were monitored to help keep them safe and well. The staff worked with and referred people to other health care services to support people’s wellbeing. Medicines were managed safely and people had their medicines at the times they needed them.

People were involved in planning and preparing their meals according to their choices. They took part in activities they were interested in and staff encouraged people to try new ones.

Staff promoted and respected people's diversity and lifestyle choices. Information was made available in accessible formats to help people understand the care and support agreed.

People were supported to have choice in their daily lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff respected people’s privacy, dignity, independence and the choices they made.

People experienced responsive and person-centred care. They exercised choice and control of their lives and were involved in the running of the service. Support plans recorded what was important to the person and were current. Where people's needs changed, the provider responded and reviewed the care provided.

People maintained relationships with those that mattered to them. People and their relatives had opportunities to share their views and the provider listened to their feedback. Arrangements were in place to monitor, investigate and respond to complaints.

The provider used a range of audits and checks to monitor and assess the quality and safety of the service. Where issues were identified, action was taken to improve the care and support people received.

Staff worked in partnership with other agencies for the benefit of the people living there.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 30 September 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive. We will inspect in line with our inspection schedule or sooner if required.

Aeolian House is a care home registered to provide care and accommodation for up to eight adults with learning disabilities. The house includes a kitchen, lounge and dining room, bathrooms and toilets. Each person has their own bedroom and there is access to an enclosed garden. At the time of our inspection six people were using the service.

When we inspected, there was no registered manager at the service. A new manager had been appointed and was in the process of applying to register. 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 told us they felt safe and well cared for. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns they had about the care and welfare of people to protect them from abuse.

People had personalised support plans that included expected outcomes and goals for them to achieve and how they wanted their needs to be met. People were encouraged to make their own decisions and remain independent as far as possible. Risk assessments identified risks associated with individual care needs and staff knew how to manage and minimise risks to people’s health and well-being.

People’s health needs were monitored and they had access to health care services when they needed them. Referrals were made to other professionals as necessary to help keep them safe and well. Medicines were managed safely and people had their medicines at the times they needed them.

People were supported to eat a healthy diet which took account of their preferences and nutritional needs. People chose what they wanted to eat and drink and were supported to buy, prepare and cook their meals.

The service worked in a way which recognised and maintained people's rights. The acting manager and staff understood the relevance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and consent issues which related to the people in their care. They took appropriate action where a person may be deprived of their liberty.

People were frequently consulted about the care and support they received and knew how to raise any concerns. Arrangements were in place for dealing with complaints and responding to people’s comments and feedback.

People were supported to maintain their hobbies and interests at home and in their local community. They were supported to maintain relationships with family and friends who were important to them.

The provider followed an appropriate recruitment process which helped ensure that people were protected from unsuitable staff. Staff received a structured induction and essential training at the beginning of their employment. This was followed by ongoing refresher training to update and develop their knowledge and skills. Staff also undertook training specific to the needs of people they supported. Staff felt well supported in their roles and the standard and quality of their work was kept under review through ongoing performance appraisal.

People were supported by an established staff team who knew people well and were able to explain what mattered most to individuals. Staff treated people with kindness and respect and promoted their independence as far as possible. Individuals were encouraged to build and develop their independent living skills both in and outside the service.

The registered provider had values for the service, which were known and followed by the staff team. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and were clear about their roles and responsibilities. People and staff told us they found the manager to be approachable and supportive.

There were effective quality assurance systems that were used to monitor, review and assess the service. The manager and provider encouraged feedback from people who used the service, relatives, and staff and this was used to improve their experience at Aeolian House.

We saw the records of three people living at the home and spoke with people who had lived there for a number of years. People were very familiar with the contents of their care records which were individualised and up to date. The records contained clear guidance for staff regarding the best ways to provide support and care that met people's needs.

Staff told us they felt well trained and supported to provide a good service for people. Their records evidenced an extensive training programme. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals which meant the provider had ensured they were well supported to provide care and support.

We reviewed staff rosters and lone worker policies and risk assessments. The documents assured us that people who used the service were supported by enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet their needs

We were provided with a copy of the most recent statement of purpose produced by the provider and kept at the service for people who used the service to see. This assured us that people who used the service or their representatives benefited from the knowledge that the Care Quality Commission was informed of the services provided.

The documents we were sent following our inspection visit included the service's complaints policy and procedure which had been updated and was accurate and detailed. We were assured that there was an effective complaints system available and that comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.

We saw that people were relaxed around the staff member on duty. We saw that there were open and friendly conversations between people using the service and staff.

People who used the service told us that they felt safe and were well looked after by the staff at the service.