You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 January 2017

This inspection took place on 17 November 2016 and was unannounced.

Alexandra House is a small private owned residential home which offers care and treatment for up to five people with learning and physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were four people living at the home. People living at the home were older and most had lived together for a long time.

There were two registered managers 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.

At our last inspection in October 2015, the provider was found to be in breach of four regulations of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

We carried out this fully comprehensive inspection to see what action the provider had taken in response to the shortfalls we had previously identified. We found during this inspection that the provider had made the improvements needed and was now meeting the regulations.

Staff training was tailored to the individual needs of people who lived at the home. Staff told us that they had good access to training. Staff benefitted from regular supervision where they could discuss their practice and any training needs they had.

People’s medicines were stored and administered safely by trained staff. Staff worked alongside healthcare professionals when needed to ensure that people’s health needs were met.

Risk assessments promoted independence whilst also ensuring people were kept safe from known hazards. Systems were in place to report incidents and staff knew their responsibility to do so. Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people.

Staff provided care in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA). Records demonstrated that people’s rights were protected as staff acted in accordance with the MCA when being supported to make specific decisions. Where people had restrictions placed upon them, these were applied for appropriately.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to keep them safe whilst enabling them to participate in their chosen activities. The provider undertook checks to ensure that staff were suitable for the job.

People were supported by kind, compassionate staff who knew them well. Staff promoted people’s privacy and dignity when working with people.

People’s care plans contained information for staff on their needs, wishes and what was important to them.

People were supported to eat meals that they enjoyed in line with their dietary requirements. Care plans were person centred and reflected people’s needs and preferences. Reviews happened regularly to identify changes in people’s needs.

People lived in an inclusive atmosphere where they were involved in decisions about their home. A complaints policy was in place so people could be supported to make a complaint. People had access to a range of activities in line with their interests. People went on regular outings of their choice.

Staff felt supported by management and were involved in making decisions about the home. People’s views were sought by management and systems were in place to ensure care was of a good quality.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 January 2017

The service was safe.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities in safeguarding people and understood how to follow procedures to keep people safe.

Risk assessments promoted independence whilst also ensuring people were kept safe from known hazards. Staff understood the need to report incidents.

Sufficient staff were present to meet people’s needs and checks were undertaken to ensure staff were appropriate for their roles.

Contingency systems and emergency procedures were in place in case of emergencies and staff understood how to respond.

People’s medicines were stored and administered safely by trained staff.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 January 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported to eat food in line with their preferences. People’s dietary requirements were met.

People were supported by staff who were trained and knowledgeable about their individual needs.

Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and people were supported in line with its’ guidance.

People had access to a range of healthcare professionals, staff worked to their guidance.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 January 2017

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff that knew them well.

People were included in decisions about their care and staff encouraged them to be independent.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 January 2017

The service was responsive.

Care plans were person centred and reflected people’s needs, interests and preferences.

People were supported to engage in activities that were meaningful to them.

A complaints policy and procedure was in place that gave people opportunities to raise any concerns that they might have.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 January 2017

The service was well- led.

Staff told us that they had support from management and had opportunities to contribute to the running of the service.

People’s views were sought when making decisions about the home.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care and to ensure that people received good care.