We carried out a review of the data available to us about Anro 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 Anro House, you can give feedback on this service.
Anro House is a residential care home for up to five people with learning difficulties. The large terraced property is situated close to the Deal seafront and is within close walking distance to shops and leisure facilities.
Rating at last inspection
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Why the service is rated Good.
The inspection took place on 18 June 2018 and was unannounced.
Anro House accommodates four people in one adapted building. Anro House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
Not everyone using Anro House receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy.
Anro House continued to enable people to live their lives to the full. The atmosphere was calm and friendly, staff and people talked and laughed together. Staff treated people with kindness and respect. A relative told us “I cannot find one fault with Anro House, the care is fantastic there”.
People at Anro House continued to be safe. Staff knew how to report suspected or alleged abuse and people had opportunities to raise concerns. Risks to people were identified and mitigated against and people were encouraged to take risks to promote their wellbeing and independence.
Staff continued to be recruited safely. Staff took part in a range of face to face and eLearning which staff described as “superb”. People told us that they thought staff had appropriate training to care for them. Staff regularly met with and felt supported by the registered manager who they went on to describe as “very helpful and supportive”, a “super boss”.
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.
Medicines continued to be managed safely. Policies and procedures were in place and a system of regular audits and checks of all areas of the service meant that any errors were quickly identified and resolved.
The premises continued to meet the needs of people. It was clean and well maintained. Staff knew how to protect against the spread of infection and people helped with cleaning and laundry. Since the last inspection, redecoration had taken place and peoples rooms were large and decorated to peoples individual tastes.
Care continued to be steered by developments in best practise. The registered manager attended a variety of learning disability forums and developments were discussed in team meetings and through training sessions. Care plans were person centred and thorough and were written in a way that was meaningful to people.
Staff knew people very well, they spoke with fondness about each person and told us about them in detail. Peoples communication needs were assessed and staff used different methods to enable people to communicate their views and choices in their own way, through discussions, reviews and house meetings.
People were supported to lead healthy lives. Staff encouraged healthy eating and exercise and people decided on the menu, chose the ingredients and were involved in preparing and cooking meals.
Staff worked well together and there was a clear vision that staff demonstrated. When people were unwell, staff responded quickly and contacted the relevant professionals. Policies and procedures were in place to ensure that care was responsive and delivered consistently within Anro House and throughout health services.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. Staff worked with people and their representatives to ensure that care plans and support reflected their care needs. People discussed what they would like to happen if they were to pass away, and their wishes were respected.
The registered manager sought feedback from people using the service, staff, relatives and health professionals and an accessible complaints procedure was available. Complaints, compliments, feedback, errors and incidents were recorded and these were collected and analysed by both the registered manager and the provider to identify patterns and if lessons could be learnt.
People’s information was kept securely in the office and staff were respected people’s privacy, dignity and confidentiality.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Anro House provides accommodation and support to up to five adults who may have learning disabilities or need support to maintain good mental health.
There was a registered manager in post who was present at 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.
The registered manager was supported by a deputy manager. They were also the registered manager of another service in Dover. The registered manager had been in charge at the service for a long time. They knew people and staff well and had a good oversight of everything that happened at the service. The registered manager led by example and promoted the ethos of the service, which was to support people to achieve their full potential. The registered manager also made sure there were regular checks of the safety and quality of the service. She listened to peoples’ views and opinions, and acted on them.
Staffing levels were sufficient and planned in line with people‘s needs and activities. The levels were flexible to meet the needs of the people throughout the day and night.
There was a training programme in place, which included induction training for new staff, to ensure they had the skills and competencies to fulfil their role. The registered manager supported staff so that they were effective in their role to care for people, and deliver consistent quality care. Each member of staff also had an annual appraisal to discuss their future training and development needs. All staff were checked and had the relevant documentation in place to make sure they were safe to work at the service. Staff fully understood their roles and responsibilities, as well as the values of the service.
Staff were aware of how to protect people from harm, and how to report any concerns. Staff respected people’s dignity and were kind and caring. They supported people to have meaningful lives and supported them to learn and develop new skills.
Risks to people had been identified and staff had clear guidance in place to ensure that people were supported people in the least restrictive way, to ensure they maintained their chosen life styles.
People had access to health care services to meet their needs, and professional guidance was implemented when people needed further support. People told us how they were able to visit their doctor if they felt unwell, and were supported by staff to do this.
People told us they received their medicines safely. Effective systems for the management, administration, storage, and disposal of medicines were in place. People’s medicines were reviewed regularly by their doctor to make sure they were still suitable.
The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. The registered manager and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and arrangements were in place if people were at risk of being deprived of their liberty. People were supported to make decisions and choices about all aspects of their lives.
The registered manager assessed people’s needs before they moved in the service. They looked at staffing levels to ensure the person’s need would be fully met. People were happy with the care and support they received. Each person had a personalised care and support plan with detailed information of each aspect of their lives. Pictures and photographs were included in the plans to make the plans meaningful to people. Staff had a good understanding of how people preferred to communicate, and supported people with sign language if they needed further support.
People and their relatives had been involved in planning and making decisions about their care. People told us how they were supported to maintain and continue to develop their independence. They spoke about their regular care plan reviews, noting their achievements, and what they had planned for the future.
There was a calm and relaxed atmosphere, with lots of conversations and laughter. People talked about their lives, what hobbies and pastimes they enjoyed, including going to the local pub. People had choices about how they wanted to live their lives, and staff supported them to reach new goals, and do the things they wanted to do. People’s individual religious preferences were respected and staff supported them to attend church services.
Each week people were involved in planning the menu and cooking meals. Staff had an awareness of people’s nutritional needs and supported people to maintain a healthy diet. Meal times were flexible to meet individual choices and preferences.
People told us they would not hesitate to raise a complaint. Staff knew people very well and people told us they would tell staff about any concerns or complaints. People told us that staff listened to them and would take the action necessary to resolve their concerns.
People told us that the service was well organised. Staff told us they were supported by the management team and the service was well led. There was an open and positive culture within the
staff team. Staff were motivated and passionate about working and supporting people living at the service. They applied best practice to help improve people’s quality of life.
During our visit we saw that people were being treated with dignity and respect and people's independence was encouraged. People we spoke with told us that the staff were friendly and kind. One person told us: "I am happy living here."
People told us about activities that they took part in and that they enjoyed. People were encouraged to be involved in the running of the service including the cooking and cleaning. People maintained good physical health and mental health as the service worked closely with health and social care professionals.
We saw that people experienced safe and effective care based on detailed care plans that they developed with staff. There were risk assessments that met individual needs and provided good guidance to staff to minimise potential risks. We saw that good nutritional care was provided in a way that met people's needs and preferences.
We found that care staff were appropriately recruited, trained and supervised so that they could meet people's individual care needs. Staff told us that the manager was very supportive and approachable.