We carried out a review of the data available to us about Allanby 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 Allanby House, you can give feedback on this service.
This was an unannounced inspection that took place on 5 December 2017. The inspection was conducted by an adult social care inspector and an expert by experience.
At the last inspection, the service was rated as good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.
There was no registered manager in post but a senior support worker was leading the home with support from another 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.
The provider was advertising for a new manager for this and another service as their previous candidate had moved to another post. An experienced and trained senior support worker was acting as manager of the service.
Staff had received training on safeguarding and understood how to protect people from harm and abuse. CIC had a confidential phone line for staff to report any concerns.
We made a recommendation about increasing security in people's bedrooms to ensure people's medicines and money continued to be managed safely.
Good risk assessments and emergency planning were in place. Accidents and incidents were monitored and analysed and action taken to reduce risks.
We saw that staffing levels were suitable to meet the assessed needs of people in the service. Staff recruitment was thorough with all checks completed before new staff had access to vulnerable people. The organisation had suitable disciplinary procedures in place.
Medicines were appropriately managed. People had their medicines reviewed by their GP and specialist health care providers.
Staff were trained in infection control and the home was clean, orderly and well maintained.
Staff received induction, training and supervision had helped them to give good levels of care and support. They were trained in principles of care in relation to people living with a learning disability and specialised care of people who also lived with a physical disability. Restraint was not used in this service.
Consent was sought, where possible. The service operated within the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People had access to health care and staff ensured that they saw specialists like consultants, occupational therapists, dieticians, dentists and opticians.
People were happy with the food provided and the staff were aware of how to support people to get good nutrition.
The home was well maintained and well decorated and furnished. The home was secure and staff careful about who came into the house.
Staff on duty displayed a caring attitude and were affectionate, empathic and kind. People in the service responded warmly to them. Staff understood how to support people to maintain their dignity and privacy. Staff showed both empathy and respect for people living with a learning disability. People in the service had access to advocacy and some people had a family member who took on this role.
People's needs were assessed and care plans in place. People received appropriate care and support because care plans were detailed and responsive to their needs.
People went out to shop and for meals. Some people enjoyed sport and going to social events. Other people preferred quieter activities in the home. Everyone in the home could go out to meals, holidays and days out together or singly as they preferred.
Staff had been trained in end of life care and had helped people at this stage in life.
Quality monitoring was evident in all aspects of the service with detailed audits and reports completed on a regular basis. Changes were made when issues were uncovered during the process as quality monitoring was used to improve the service.
We carried out this announced inspection on 9 & 13 October 2015. We last inspected this service on 26 April 2013. At that inspection we found that the provider was meeting all of the regulations that we assessed.
Allanby House provides personal care and accommodation for up to six people who have a learning disability, and some people have complex healthcare needs. The home is run by Community Integrated Care (CIC).
CIC are a large national charity providing services for people who are living with a learning disability. The home is a purpose built bungalow with ensuite bedrooms that have been maintained and furnished to high standards. There are adapted bathing facilities for people with limited mobility. An adapted vehicle and large well-kept garden areas are available for people's use. The home is in a residential area of Flimby in West Cumbria. There are suitable shared facilities including toilets and bathrooms, a sitting room, kitchen and dining area. A new conservatory was in place to add more communal space.
There was a registered manager employed at the home. 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 manager was registered for this home and to run two other small homes nearby. These were also run by the same provider, Community Integrated Care (CIC).
People told us that they were safe living in this home and said that the staff supported them to stay safe in the local community. We saw that people who lived in the home were comfortable with the staff who worked there.
People were protected from the risk of abuse because the staff in the home understood their responsibility to keep people safe and the actions to take if they were concerned a person may be at risk of harm.
There were enough staff to provide the care that people needed and to support people to follow the activities they enjoyed. People were treated with kindness and respect.
People enjoyed the meals provided in the home. We found that people’s nutritional needs were routinely assessed and monitored from time to time to ensure that they had healthy diets and life styles.
All the staff employed in the home had received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to provide the support people needed.
The staff knew how to support people to make choices about their lives and how they communicated their wishes. People were given choices about all aspects of their lives and were supported to maintain their independence.
The registered manager of the home was knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, (DoLS). The focus of the home was on promoting individuals’ rights and independence and no one in the home had any unlawful restrictions on their right to make their own choices.
Medicines were handled safely in the home and people received their medication as prescribed by their doctor. People were supported to maintain good health because they had access to appropriate health care services, this had included end of life care to people.
There was no restriction on when people could visit the home. People were able to see their friends and families when they wanted.
The atmosphere created in the home was open and inclusive. People had been asked for their views about the service and the care they received and action was taken in response to their comments.
We found that the service was well-led. There was a corporate quality assurance system in place which gave both the registered manager and the provider up to date information as to how the service was performing.
We were able to see that people were supported to lead active and full lives and access the local community. We observed people being supported by staff to undertake meaningful tasks, like joining in household chores, and activities. We saw there was a relaxed and homely atmosphere with a friendly rapport between staff and people living in the home.
We saw that people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. The home had developed good links with healthcare professionals to ensure that their health needs were being well met.
One healthcare professional commented, "Staff are doing a fantastic job with people's healthcare needs, brilliant home and care."
The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people living and working in the home.
The home was well designed and equipped to effectively and safely care for people with limited mobility and more complex healthcare needs.
When we visited there were five people living in the home. We visited on a Friday afternoon when people were relaxing and spending time in different ways of their individual choosing. One person had a visit from their relative; another was listening to music in their room, while another person had been out to the shops. There was one person who had complex healthcare needs and when we visited they were resting in bed.
We observed lively and positive interactions between staff and people in the home which made for a relaxed and friendly atmosphere. We also observed staff responding sensitively to people and picking up cues from body language when they needed assistance or reassurance.
From observations and by checking records and speaking with staff we were able to see that staff were well trained and supported to offer care and support to people in a skilled and sensitive manner.
We judged that people were leading interesting and meaningful lives and were being supported to stay healthy and well. The home was well designed and equipped to effectively and safely care for people with more complex healthcare and mobility problems.
"I am fine...comfortable".
"This is my house and it's nice. My visitors come today".
We could also see that people were relaxed, secure and comfortable in their own home.