Maurice Edelman House

Updated 11 July 2018

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on 21 May 2018. The inspection visit was unannounced and was undertaken by two inspectors.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We looked at information received from statutory notifications the provider had sent to us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. We contacted local authority commissioners who contract the service to find out their views. No areas of concerns were reported to us.

We spoke with three people living in the home and two relatives who visited whilst we were there. Some of the people who lived at the home had complex needs and were not able to tell us about their care and support. We therefore spent time in the communal areas observing how people were cared for and observed how staff interacted with people. This helped us get an understanding of the care people received and to assess whether people's needs were appropriately met.

We spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager and four staff members. We reviewed three people's care records to see how their support was planned and delivered. We looked at duty rotas, training records, complaints and compliment records and other records related to people’s care and how the service operated. This included records of the provider’s quality monitoring checks.

Updated 11 July 2018

We inspected Maurice Edelman House on 21 May 2018. Our inspection visit was unannounced.

Maurice Edelman is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to 16 people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Maurice Edelman House provides a service to people who live permanently in the home and also to people who use the respite care service. There were 10 people living at the home and three people using the respite service at the time of our visit.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion.

When we last inspected this service it was rated as ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service continued to be rated as ‘Good’.

A requirement of the service’s registration is that they have 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection.

Staff had a good understanding of what constituted abuse and what actions to take if they had any concerns. Staff knew the risks to people's health and followed risk management plans to keep people safe without restricting them unnecessarily.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s individual needs and keep them safe. Checks were carried out prior to staff starting work to help the registered manager determine their suitability to work with people who used the service. Staff received an induction when they started at the service and completed ongoing training to support them in meeting people's needs effectively. People told us staff were friendly and caring and had the right skills to provide the care and support that they required.

A safe procedure for managing people’s medicines was in place and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff understood the importance of maintaining good infection control procedures to maintain the cleanliness of the home and minimise the risk of the spread of infection.

The registered manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) to ensure people were supported in a way that did not inappropriately restrict their freedom. They had sought the necessary authorisation from the relevant authority where there were restrictions to people's freedom that were deemed necessary to keep them safe; known as Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People were provided with a choice of meals which took into account their likes and dislikes and were encouraged to eat a varied diet that took into account their nutritional needs.

The management team ensured people accessed healthcare professionals when needed and records confirmed advice and care support required to maintain people’s health and wellbeing.

Each person had a care and support plan with detailed information and guidance personal to them to support staff in meeting people’s needs. Staff knew people’s abilities, support needs and preferred routines and encouraged people to make their own decisions. Staff were caring and patient towards people and we saw they were responsive to people’s needs. People had opportunities to engage in, and experience, different stimulating activities both inside and outside the home to support their mental, physical and emotional wellbeing. People were able to maintain personal relationships with people that were important to them.

The provider had quality monitoring systems to ensure people received care and services to the standards the provider expected. The managers regularly reviewed the care and support people received to help ensure any areas for improvement were identified and acted upon. Staff felt supported by the managers who were approachable and open to suggestions about the service people received.