Archived: Newholme

Updated 9 October 2015

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.

This inspection took place on 28 August 2015 and was unannounced. It was carried out by one inspector. Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports, statutory notifications (issues providers are legally required to notify us about) other data and enquiries. At the last inspection on 31 October 2013 the service was meeting essential standards of quality and safety and no concerns were identified.

The provider experienced technical difficulties submitting their Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make. Due to formatting issues the electronic version of the PIR was not accessible prior to inspection. We discussed the content of the PIR during the inspection and the provider subsequently submitted a hard copy to us.

We were only able to have limited conversations with two people who lived in the home, the rest of the people were unable to communicate verbally due to their language and learning difficulties. To help us understand people’s experiences of the service we observed how people were supported and also had conversations with their relatives and the staff. During the inspection we spoke with the deputy manager and four other members of care staff. We reviewed three care plans and other records relevant to the running of the home. This included staff training records, medication records, complaints and incident files. Following the inspection we telephoned three people’s relatives to gain their views on the care and support provided by the service.

Updated 9 October 2015

This inspection took place on 28 August 2015 and was unannounced.

The service provides accommodation and support for up to eight adults with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of the inspection there were eight people living in the home with complex care and communication needs. Most of the people had severe learning and physical disabilities including mobility needs. People had limited or no verbal communication skills and we were only able to engage in short conversations with two of the people. People required staff support with all of their personal care needs and needed two staff to support them when they went out into the community.

The service had 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We were unable to communicate verbally with most of the people therefore we relied on our observations of care and our conversations with people’s relatives and staff to help us understand their experiences.

People received care and support in line with their individual care plans. They appeared very happy and comfortable with the staff who were supporting them. We observed people responded positively when staff approached them with smiles and happy facial expressions. One person said “I like it here very much”. Relatives told us they were very happy with the care provided. One person’s relative said “Staff are very caring and always look after [their relative] very well”. Another person’s relative told us “The manager is fantastic and they all seem to work together as a very good team”.

We observed staff treated people in the home with kindness, dignity and respect. The staff were exceptionally friendly and considerate and supported people and their colleagues extremely well.

People’s relatives said they were always made very welcome and were encouraged to visit the home as often as they wished. They said the service was very good at keeping them informed and involving them in decisions about their relatives care.

Individual communication profiles were available to help staff understand the non-verbal ways in which people expressed their preferences. We observed staff always checked with people before providing care or support and then acted on people’s choices. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make certain decisions about their care and welfare the service knew how to protect people’s rights.

There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s complex needs and to care for them safely. People were engaged in a variety of activities within the home and in the community and there were usually sufficient numbers of staff to support people to go out most days of the week. This ensured people experienced a good quality of life.

Staff received appropriate training to support people’s mental and physical health needs. People received their medicines safely and were supported by a range of external health and social care professionals.

The service’s quality monitoring systems enabled the service to maintain high standards of care and to promote continuing service improvements.