You are here

Cherry Tree House Requires improvement

We are carrying out a review of quality at Cherry Tree House. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 7 November 2019

About the service

Cherry Tree House is a care home located in a purpose-built detached property. Communal areas include spacious living and dining areas, kitchens and secure gardens. The property is on two floors with access by lift and stairs. Two self-contained bungalows are within the secure garden.

The service can provide support and accommodation for up to 11 people who have learning disabilities, autistic spectrum conditions or additional needs. At the time of our inspection, eight people were living there.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risks to people’s safety had not always been assessed or reviewed as required. This could place people or staff at risk of harm.

Systems for monitoring, reviewing and improving quality and standards were not always effective. Some checks were not in place, and others did not identify shortfalls or highlight action when required.

The provider had not displayed the latest CQC inspection rating on their website. This meant people did not have easy access to information about the service.

Some care plan reviews had not taken place as scheduled. Care plans were personalised and helped identify what was important to people.

There had been improvements at the service since the last inspection. We received positive feedback about the new manager, and changes had been made to improve the culture and the quality of care provided.

People's medicines were administered and managed safely. Staff received training and the provider regularly checked staff’s competency in the management of medicines.

Staff felt supported and received training and appraisals. Some staff had not had supervision as frequently as the provider required, but a plan was in place to address this. People were supported by enough staff and regular agency staff were used when needed. Staff were safely recruited.

We received positive feedback overall from relatives. They said their loved ones generally seemed happy living at Cherry Tree House. Staff were kind and caring and treated people with dignity and respect.

People were supported to maintain social relationships and participate in some activities. A plan was in place to develop activities further.

Staff had contact with other professionals to ensure people’s needs could be met. People accessed routine and specialist healthcare services and were supported to eat and drink enough to remain healthy.

People were supported to have some choice and control in 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 where possible. 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 service was registered for the support of up to 11 people and was not a domestic property. This is not in line with current best practice guidance. However, the building was well established in the residential area, and steps had been taken to ensure it fitted in to the local community. Staff did not wear anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

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 was now focusing on them having opportunities for them to gain new skills and become more independent, although this was a change which had only been in place for a few months.

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 a

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 7 November 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 November 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 November 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 November 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 7 November 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.