We carried out a review of the data available to us about Patrick 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 Patrick House, you can give feedback on this service.
Patrick House is registered to provide personal care for up to six people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection six people were living at the service. Accommodation is provided over three floors, accessed by stairs. A communal lounge and kitchen dining area are based on the ground floor.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they liked living at Patrick House. They told us they felt safe and respected by staff. People were supported to lead active and independent lives, in line with their needs and wishes.
People’s care plans contained guidance for staff about how to provide support safely and to minimise risks to people whilst promoting their independence. Staff were trained in their responsibilities for safeguarding adults and knew what action to take if they witnessed or suspected any abuse.
Systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff supported people to maintain their health by making appropriate referrals to community health professionals and acting on any advice they were given.
There were enough staff provided to meet people’s needs. We observed staff were available to support and advise people throughout the day and as people needed this.
The provider had recruitment procedures in place to make sure staff had the required skills and were of suitable character and background.
Staff were provided with regular training, annual appraisals and supervisions, which supported them to conduct their roles effectively.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
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 were involved in menu planning and shopping for food, to promote choice and independence. Staff were aware of people’s dietary requirements and preferences.
The provider had a complaints procedure in place. Information about how to complain was provided to people. People living at the service said they could talk to the registered manager and staff if they had a complaint or any worries.
The registered manager understood the regulatory requirements and monitored the quality and safety of the service on a regular basis. Staff displayed a commitment to their role. They told us they loved their jobs and would recommend Patrick House as a place to work and a place to live.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was good (published 20 June 2017).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection, in December 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.
People continued to receive safe care. They were supported by staff who were aware of their role and responsibilities to protect people from avoidable harm.
Risks relating to people’s needs including the environment, had been assessed and planned for and were regularly monitored and reviewed. Procedures were in place to report any accidents and incidents and these were investigated and acted upon appropriately.
Staff were appropriately recruited and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their individual needs. People were supported to receive their medicines safely.
The care that people received continued to be effective. Staff had access to the support, supervision and training that they required to work effectively in their roles. Mental health training was identified as a requirement; the registered manager took immediate action to arrange for this to be provided.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition and food preferences were respected and provided.
People continued to receive good care from staff that they had developed positive relationships with. Staff were caring and treated people with respect, kindness and dignity. Staff supported people to maximise their independence. People had access to information about independent advocacy should they have required this support. People were involved in discussions and decisions about how they received their care and support.
People continued to receive a service that was responsive to their individual needs. Staff had information available to support them to provide an individualised service based on people’s needs, preferences, routines and what was important to them. Staff had limited information about people’s mental health needs but the registered manager took immediate action to address this. The provider’s complaints policy and procedure had been made available for people.
The service continued to be well-led. People, relative’s and staff were positive that the leadership was good. Communication was open and transparent and the provider had quality assurance processes in place that encouraged people to give feedback about the service. The provider had effective arrangements for monitoring and assessing the quality and safety of care and support people experienced.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service. Our inspection was unannounced which meant the provider and staff did not know we were coming.
Patrick House is a residential home for up to six adults with autistic spectrum disorders and some learning disabilities. There were six adults living at the home at the time of our inspection. There was a registered manager in post who was present during our visit. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider.
People who lived in the home told us they felt safe and we saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. There had not always been the planned number of staff on duty, but there were always enough at the times people needed support.
Staff received a wide range of appropriate training and were knowledgeable about the needs of people living in the home. They provided effective care and support that met people’s individual needs.
During our visit we found a caring atmosphere and people told us that staff were kind to them. People were able to pursue a wide range of interests and hobbies with appropriate support from staff.
Management systems were well established to monitor the quality of the service.
The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS is a code of practice to supplement the main MCA 2005 code of practice. We found staff were knowledgeable about how to apply both of these and no current applications for DoLS were needed.
We found that people were asked for their consent prior to receiving care and treatment. We found people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.
We found the home to be homely and maintained appropriately.
We found that people were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. We found that the provider had a system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.
People told us that staff members obtained their consent before supporting them with care or treatment. Care records that we checked recorded which decisions people were able to make for themselves and which decisions they did not have the capacity to make.
People received the care and support they required to improve their health and well-being. Care records were written in detail and provided clear guidance to staff members. People we spoke with said staff always supported them with their care needs.
People were provided with a choice of meals and staff members supported them to cook these meals. One person told us that they were supported to eat meals that met their ethnic needs.
Medicines were stored appropriately and records were maintained to show all storage areas were kept at the correct temperature. Administration records were kept and people received their medicines in a safe way.
The service had a policy and procedure to guide people in how to make a complaint and information about taking complaints further. We observed that staff members took people's concerns seriously, even if they were not able to easily identify the nature of the concern or resolve it.
Recruitment checks were all carried out or obtained prior to new staff members starting work with the service.
They explained that they knew all the staff and they were always made welcome. They told us staff were friendly at Patrick House.
One person told us, 'I do a voluntary job and take part in many activities in the community, I am fairly independent but I know that the staff are there to support me when I need them.'
One relative told us, 'If something is not right the staff at the service will put things right. It is done straight away.'