We carried out a review of the data available to us about 60 Bullpond Lane 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 60 Bullpond Lane, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People showed they were happy living at 60 Bullpond Lane, they felt safe and comfortable with the staff team. Relatives liked the way the staff supported their family members. One relative said, “The service we receive from some of the staff at Bullpond Lane is exceptional. They are extremely attentive towards us, our [family member], and each other. What draws us to the home the most is its ‘family-feel’ that welcomes everyone. It’s a caring and warm place, that we believe our [family member] feels comfortable and safe in.”
Staff were kind and caring and knew each person well. They enjoyed working at the home and felt the registered manager gave them good, supportive leadership. There were enough staff to support people in the way they wanted. Staff received training, supervision, guidance and support so that they could do their job well. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and encouraged independence wherever possible.
The provider had systems in place to manage risks and keep people safe from avoidable harm. Staff followed good practice guidelines to prevent the spread of infection and gave people their medicines safely. People were supported to be as active as possible. The registered manager and staff team strove for continuous improvement, worked well with external professionals and ensured that people were part of their local community.
Staff supported people 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.
The size of service meets current best practice guidance. This promotes people living in a small domestic style property to enable them to have the opportunity of living a full life.
The principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance ensure people with a learning disability and or autism who use a service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best outcomes, that include control, choice and independence. At this inspection the provider had ensured they were applied.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways: promotion of choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as fulfilling and enjoyable a life as they chose to lead.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection we rated this service Good (report published on 9 March 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we might inspect sooner.
60 Bullpond Lane is a residential care home that provides accommodation and support for up to six people with learning disabilities and autism spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were six people living at this service.
The home has a registered manager in post. 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.
People using the service were safe as the provider had effective systems in place to protect them from avoidable harm. Risk assessments were in place for each person who lived at the home and for the environment. There was a sufficient number of staff who were trained and knew how to meet people’S care needs and keep them safe. People’S medicines were administered safely and they were supported to access other healthcare professionals to maintain their health and well-being.
People were involved in choosing their activities, menus and were supported to eat a healthy and balanced diet. They and their relatives had their views sought by the service and were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. The service held monthly residents meetings, sent out annual satisfaction surveys and worked with other agencies involved in people’s care to ensure people’s needs were met.
People were treated with dignity and respect and were encouraged to maintain their independence, interests and hobbies. Staff understood the mental capacity act and associated deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLs) and sought people’s consent before providing care. The manager held regular supervisions and performance reviews with staff to provide them with the opportunity to contribute to the running of the service and develop their skills and knowledge.
The provider had a robust recruitment system in place and ensured new staff received a comprehensive induction at the start of their employment. Staff understood the provider’s visions and values, their job roles and responsibilities.
The provider had a formal system for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people and acted on this to improve the quality of the service. They also had an effective quality monitoring process in place to ensure they were meeting the required standards of care.
We found people's needs had been assessed, and appropriate support plans and risk assessments were in place. We found people's support plans were reviewed regularly and when people's needs changed. Their consent was sought prior to any care or treatment being delivered. Where necessary, they were appropriately referred to other health and social care professionals.
People's nutritional needs were met and their choices were respected. In response to recent concerns, the provider had systems in place to ensure that people were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines.
In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.
We reviewed four care plans and associated risk assessments which were person centred and reflected individual wishes and preferred routines. There was evidence of people's involvement in reviews which demonstrated that they were able to contribute towards their care and treatment. Staff were knowledgeable about people's specific care needs and understood their communication styles meaning that care was safe and appropriate.
We observed that interaction between staff and people was effective and that this encouraged people to participate in activities. A weekly activity schedule was in place for each person but alternatives were offered by staff if people changed their minds. During our visit, some people were supported to go bowling in the local community and were encouraged to take part in other activities, including arts and crafts, cooking, listening to music or attending day centres.
We noted that staff were patient and kind and understood the needs of the people that they were supporting.