We carried out a review of the data available to us about Tudor 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 Tudor House, you can give feedback on this service.
Tudor House is a small service providing accommodation and personal care for up to four people who have a learning disability and/or autism and require 24-hour support and care on a short term basis. On the day of our inspection, four people were using the service.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were safe from harm as there were enough staff with the appropriate skills and experience who had been recruited safely. Systems and processes were in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Staff knew how to manage risks and to support people effectively. People received their medicines as prescribed and infection control procedures were in place to ensure the service was clean and to prevent the spread of infection. The provider had learnt lessons and improved the service when things had gone wrong.
Assessments were in place which detailed people’s needs and choices. People received support from staff who had been trained and had regular supervision to ensure their support to people was effective. People were fully supported to have a balanced and varied diet and to make choices about their meals. People were able to continue to access community, leisure and healthcare services as they would do if they were at home. People were supported to live healthy lives and could access healthcare services when they needed to.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of 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.
People and their relatives were supported by staff who were warm, friendly, caring and kind. Staff provided consistent care and support within homely surroundings. Staff supported people in a dignified and respectful way and involved them in making choices and decisions about their day to day lives whilst at the service.
Care was personalised to ensure people had choice and control and to meet their individual needs and preferences. The service considered people’s communication needs and information was available in different formats. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and dealt with complaints appropriately. Due to the nature of the service, they did not provide end of life care to people.
The registered manager and staff were clear about their role, responsibilities and regulatory requirements. The service had a well-defined management structure, with a consistent staff team. Quality audits were in place and the service was monitored to ensure it provided high quality care and support. People and their relatives were involved in developing the service and encouraged to give their feedback. This information was used to look at how the service could be continuously improved.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (2 November 2016)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information, we may inspect sooner.
Tudor House is a small service providing respite accommodation and personal care for up to four people who have a learning disability and require 24 hour support and care. On the day of our inspection three people were receiving a respite service.
The service had 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 were safe because staff supported them to understand how to keep safe and staff knew how to manage risk effectively. There were appropriate arrangements in place for medication to be stored and administered safely, and there were sufficient numbers of care staff with the correct skills and knowledge to safely meet people’s needs.
The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and are required to report on what we find. The MCA sets out what must be done to make sure the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected. The DoLS are a code of practice to supplement the main MCA code of practice. Appropriate mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been undertaken by relevant professionals. This ensured that any decisions was in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act.
Care records were regularly reviewed and updated and showed that the person or their representatives had been involved in the planning of their care. They included people’s preferences and individual needs so that staff had clear information on how to give people the support they needed.
The service was well led. People knew the manager and found them to be approachable and available in the home. Everyone living and working in the service had the opportunity to say how they felt about the home and the service it provided.
The provider and registered manager had clear systems in place to check on the quality and safety of the service provided and to put action plans in place where needed.
We saw that staff gave people a choice of food and encouraged them to take part in the preparation of group meals..
We saw that staff employed at the service had regular support and supervision and they were encouraged to make suggestions to make the service better. One staff suggestion had been to put photographs on doors to help people who use the respite service know which was their room.
.
A relative commented that "There is always a welcoming and friendly atmosphere at Tudor House and I am always happy for my relative to go for their short stays there.' They also told us that staff, 'Always communicate well with me and I am asked to complete a questionnaire after each stay.'
There was an appropriate and effective system in place that managed complaints.
We found that the service was meeting the personal, emotional and healthcare needs of people who used the service. We found that the environment was maintained safely and odour free and that all health and safety checks were up to date
We found that staff were appropriately recruited and inducted into the service and all mandatory training was up to date.