You are here

Christie Development Centre Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

About the service.

Christie Development Centre is a residential care home that was providing personal care to 10 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. It accommodates people in one building that is split and adapted into two separate homes: Christie House and Sherwood View. All bedrooms are single occupancy with their own bathroom facility. People share the lounge, dining room, kitchen and garden in each house. This promotes people living in a small domestic style property to enable them to have the opportunity of living a full life.

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 a team leader at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service did not use any restrictive intervention practices.

People's experience of using the service and what we found.

People were safely supported and protected from harm. This was because safeguarding systems and ways of managing risk were carried out well. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff employed who managed medicines safely and followed good infection control and prevention practices to protect people from harm. Staff learnt lessons when problems arose.

People's needs were effectively met, because people were thoroughly assessed with mobility, nutrition and health care, as well as any diagnosed conditions. Staff were trained to support them in these areas. People lived a comfortable life because the premises were suitably designed to meet their needs. Staff worked consistently well with other healthcare professionals.

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.

People's equality, diversity, privacy, dignity and independence were respected. Their views on their care and support were listened to. They were supported by caring and compassionate staff and so their lives were pleasant. Staff had a real affinity with people's needs and wishes and clearly enjoyed supporting them.

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.

Staff provided personalised care, which meant people experienced good support. This was achieved by producing and following person-centred support plans and knowing people's needs. People's communication needs were well met using systems and good practice. Complaints were responded to and well managed. People were assured a good end of li

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.