You are here

RNID Action on Hearing Loss Barron Winnicott Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 13 October 2016

This inspection took place on 21 and 23 September 2016 and was unannounced. When the service was last inspected in September 2013 there were no breaches of the legal requirements identified.

Barron Winnicott is registered to provided accommodation and care for up to nine deaf adults who may need additional support for conditions such as autism, learning or physical disability or their emotional development. At the time of our inspection there were eight people living at the service.

A registered manager was in post at the time of the inspection. 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’s medicines were managed and received by people safely. Staff had received training in ‘Care of Medicines’. People had the right to choose to manage their own medicines if they wanted to, with appropriate support from the service.

There were sufficient staffing levels to keep people safe and support the health and welfare needs of people living at the service.

People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of abuse and knew the correct action to take if they were concerned about a person being at risk. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults.

Risks to people were assessed and where required a risk management plan was in place to support people to manage an identified risk and keep the person safe.

People’s rights were being upheld in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This is a legal framework to protect people who are unable to make certain decisions themselves.

Staff understood the importance of promoting choice and empowerment to people when supporting them. The service enabled people to make their own decisions and assist the decision making process where they could.

People were supported by well trained staff that had sufficient knowledge and skills to enable them to care for people.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. People had enough to eat and drink to keep them healthy and had good quality, quantity and choice of food and drinks available to them.

We observed that people were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff. Staff were committed and passionate about their role.

The service was responsive to a person’s needs. A care plan was written and agreed with individuals and other interested parties, as appropriate.

The service reviewed the person’s activities, aims and objectives annually. They sought the person’s views on the service provided and future goals. People were actively encouraged and supported to be involved in making decisions about their educational programme.

People were encouraged to maintain contact with their family and were therefore not isolated from those people closest to them.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager. Staff were confident and knowledgeable of all aspects of the service. The registered manager encouraged an open line of communication with their team. Staff members confirmed that they would approach the registered manager if they had any concerns.

Through regular care plan meetings people and their representatives were encouraged to provide feedback on their experience of the service to monitor the quality of service provided.

To ensure continuous improvement the Head of Service conducted regular compliance audits. They reviewed issues such as; attendance, risk assessments, fire safety, day to day maintenance and health and safety checks. The observations identified good practice and areas where improvements were required.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 13 October 2016

The service was safe.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because there were appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

There were sufficient staffing levels to keep people safe and support the health and welfare needs of people living at the service.

Risks to people were assessed and where required a risk management plan was in place to support people manage an identified risk and keep the person safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 13 October 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported by well trained staff that had sufficient knowledge and skills to enable them to care for people.

People's rights were upheld in line with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. This provides a legal framework to protect people who are unable to make certain decisions themselves.

Staff understood the importance of promoting choice and empowerment to people when supporting them.

Caring

Good

Updated 13 October 2016

The service was caring.

We observed that people were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff.

People were supported to be independent, as far as possible.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 13 October 2016

The service was responsive to people’s needs.

A care plan was written and agreed with individuals and other interested parties, as appropriate.

The service reviewed the person’s activities, aims and objectives annually. They sought the person’s views on the service provided and future goals.

People were encouraged to maintain contact with their family and were therefore not isolated from those people closest to them.

Well-led

Good

Updated 13 October 2016

The service was well-led.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager.

Staff all had an in-depth knowledge of the people they supported and had the confidence to enable the people they support to try new activities. These actions were actively supported by the registered manager

To ensure continuous improvement the Head of Service conducted regular compliance audits. The observations identified good practice and areas where improvements were required.