You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 18 December 2018

This inspection took place on the 18 and 22 October 2018 and was announced.

Martin’s Close is a residential home. People in residential homes receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided. Both were looked at during this inspection.

Martin’s Close is registered to provide personal care and support for up to five people living with a disability, a learning need or a physical impairment. Martin’s Close is a two storey house set in a suburban area of Basingstoke with good public transport links.

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.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

At our last inspection we rated the service Good with a rating of Requires Improvement in Well-Led. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and Well-Led had improved to good.

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 the last inspection, the registered manager told us the provider had been through a series of restructures. As a result of the restructure the registered manager had been given responsibility to manage three other services within a thirty mile radius of Martin Close. A senior support worker had been appointed to oversee the day to day management of the home. Concerns had been expressed by staff and relatives about the impact of the restructure on Martin’s Close.

At this inspection the registered manager told us their responsibilities had been reduced so they managed two registered services, including Martin’s Close. They also managed a service not registered with us. We found responsibilities for staff were clear and the registered manager was maintaining a detailed oversight of the services they were responsible for. There was no adverse impact for people or staff at Martin’s Close.

The provider had robust systems and processes in place to safeguard people. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to alert the relevant professionals if they suspected abuse and were appropriately trained. Risks to people were assessed and managed safely by appropriately trained staff.

People were supported to take part in their preferred activities and to have choice in their lives so that their independence was promoted and their freedom respected. Sufficient numbers of staff were deployed to meet people's needs. Medicines were managed safely.

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 support this practice.

People’s needs and choices were met by suitably trained staff. Care plans and risk assessments were personalised and regularly reviewed and updated.

Staff liaised effectively with healthcare professionals to support people's health and wellbeing. Staff knew people well, supported them consistently and treated them with respect. People were able to easily discuss their preferences and tell staff about how they wished to be supported.

The provider had a complaints policy in place. People knew how to compl

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 18 December 2018

The service remains Good.

Effective

Good

Updated 18 December 2018

The service remains Good.

Caring

Good

Updated 18 December 2018

The service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 18 December 2018

The service remains Good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 18 December 2018

The service has improved to Good.

The registered manager had a vision to provide care which enhanced people�s lives and gave them independence. This was shared by the staff team.

Effective systems were in place for monitoring quality and safety within the service. The roles of the registered manager and staff were clearly defined.

The provider sought feedback from people and their relatives about service improvements.

Staff reflected on ways to improve care. People received timely support from relevant health and social care professionals.