We carried out a review of the data available to us about Nevin 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 Nevin House, you can give feedback on this service.
Nevin House is a residential care home providing personal care to three people who may have a Learning Disability or Autism at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to three people.
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.
The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.
As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the provider at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.
The service used some restrictive intervention practices as a last resort, in a person-centred way, in line with positive behaviour support principles.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were supported by staff who were kind and caring, often going above and beyond their role to support people. This achieved positive outcomes for people. People were supported with their communication to enable them to express choices and be involved in their care. People’s independence was encouraged and maintained where possible.
People and staff spoke positively about the management and told us the service was well led. There was a family atmosphere that promoted positive outcomes for people. People were actively supported to provide feedback and their thoughts and opinions were at the heart of the service. There was a commitment to learning and improving care through monitoring of the service.
People were kept safe by staff who knew how to report concerns of abuse and manage risks to people’s safety. There were sufficient numbers of staff to support people. Medicines were managed safely and there were effective infection control practices in place.
People were supported by staff who knew their likes, dislikes and preferences. People had access to activities that met their interests and there was a complaints process in place if people wished to complain.
People were supported by staff who had received training relevant to their role. People’s dietary needs were met and they had access to healthcare services where required. The design and décor of the service met people’s needs. 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 applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
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 17 March 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 time of our last inspection in January 2016, the provider was found to be requiring improvement in two out of the five areas we looked at. This meant that they were rated as ‘Requires Improvement’ over all because systems and process in place to monitor the quality of the service were not always effective at identifying areas for development. We also found that people were not supported to eat food that was varied and healthy, despite their wishes. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and people were being supported to maintain a healthy diet and had food that they enjoyed. However, we found further improvements were required to the quality monitoring systems and processes.
Nevin House provides accommodation and personal care for up to three people who require specialist support relating to their learning and physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection, there were two people living at the home.
There was a registered manager 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.
People were supported by enough members of staff who had been safely recruited and received adequate training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills they required to do their job effectively.
People received care and support with their consent and people’s rights were protected because processes had been fully followed to ensure people were not unlawfully restricted. They were also supported by staff who protected their privacy and dignity.
People’s nutritional needs were assessed and monitored to identify any risks associated with nutrition and hydration.
People were supported to maintain good health because staff worked closely with other health and social care professionals when necessary. People received support to take their prescribed medicines as required.
People were supported by staff that were kind and caring and that were dedicated and committed to getting to know people well. This meant that people received the care they wanted based on their personal preferences, likes and dislikes.
People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and were supported to express their views in all aspects of their lives.
The provider was very responsive because people felt involved in the planning and review of their care because staff communicated with them in ways they could understand.
People were encouraged to engage in activities that they enjoyed and were supported to maintain positive relationships with their friends and relatives.
The service was not always well led because systems and processes in place to monitor the quality of the service were not always effective. However, people were encouraged to offer feedback on the quality of the service and knew how to complain. Staff felt supported and appreciated in their work and reported the provider to have an open and honest leadership culture.
Nevin House is registered to provide residential care to three people with a learning disability. This inspection took place on 19 January 2016. The inspection was unannounced. The last inspection took place on 12 December 2013. The provider met the standards they were assessed against at this inspection. Further information of this report can be found on the CQC website
At the time of the inspection, there was a registered manager in post as required by the conditions of registration. 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.
The provider had a system to monitor the quality of the care provided but this was not always effective at identifying areas that could be further improved.
People were not supported to eat food that was varied and healthy.
People felt safe living in the home and staff understood how to identify and report any concerns relating to people’s safety and welfare.
The provider had a system to identify individual risks to people and staff was knowledgeable about how to keep people safe.
People were supported by staff that had time to meet their individual needs.
People were supported so that they received their medicines safely.
People who used the service were supported by staff who received regular training. Robust recruitment practices meant that staff employed were suitable to work with the people living at the home.
People were supported by staff that understood how to provide care in a way that promoted their human rights.
People were supported by staff that were kind and caring and knew the things that were important to them.
Staff promoted people’s privacy and dignity and treated people with care and respect.
People were involved in their own care and in making decisions as much as possible.
At the time of our inspection three people lived at Nevin House. During our inspection we spoke with all of the people who lived there, staff on duty and the registered manager.
We found that people who lived there were treated with respect and dignity. We also saw that people's independence was promoted. One staff member told us, 'People that live here have skills to do a lot for themselves. Staff provide support when needed but encourage people to do what they can for themselves.'
We saw that people's needs had been assessed by a range of health care professionals. This meant that staff had enabled people to have their health care needs monitored and met.
We found that processes were in place to protect people from the risk of harm or abuse. One person told us, 'I am safe living here. Staff look after us. I would tell the manager if something was wrong.'
We found that the provider had a staff recruitment and selection process in place. We saw that staff pre-employment checks were completed to make sure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
We saw that systems were in place to monitor the quality of the services provided so that actions, when needed, could be made to make improvements.
People we spoke with told us positive things about the service they had received. One person told us "Since coming to the home I am much happier than I was at the previous place and I don't want to leave'. Another person said "I love it here". A staff member told us that in their view the home was good. They said "The people are happy and safe."
We saw that staff treated people with respect and dignity. People told us that choices had been offered and that their views were taken into consideration.
People's needs had been assessed by a range of health professionals including doctors and the optician. This meant that people's health care needs had been monitored and met. We found that people engaged in activities that they enjoyed.
We found that recruitment checking processes needed to be improved upon to prevent any risk of unsuitable staff working at the home.
Records that we looked at and staff we spoke with confirmed that systems had been used to monitor how the home had been run.