You are here

The Regard Partnership Limited - Eastbourne Road Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 20 November 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

The Regard Partnership Limited - Eastbourne Road is a residential care home providing accommodation and support with personal to nine people with learning disabilities or on the autistic spectrum at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to nine people.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to nine people. Nine people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However. the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

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

Procedures were in place to help protect people from the risk of abuse and staff understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding people. Risk assessments were in place which provided guidance about how to support people in a safe way. There were enough staff working at the service to meet people’s needs and robust staff recruitment practices were in place. The service sought to learn lessons when accidents and incidents occurred. Steps had been taken to protect people from the risk of infection. Medicines were managed safely.

People’s needs were assessed before they moved into the service to ensure those needs could be met. Staff received training and supervision to support them in carrying out their role effectively. The design and layout of the building was suitable for the people using it. People had a choice of what they ate and drank. The service worked with other agencies and professionals to support people’s health care needs. 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 told us staff were kind and caring and treated them respectfully. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, dignity and independence. The provider sought to meet people’s needs in relation to equality and diversity.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s needs. People and their relatives were involved in developing these plans. People had access to a range of social and leisure activities and we saw people enjoying these on the day of our inspection. Complaints procedures were in place. Steps had been taken to make communication with people accessible to them.

Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place to help drive improvements at the service. Some of these included seeking the views of people who used the service and others. The service had links with other agencies to help develop best practice.

The service applied the principles and value of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. 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 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 focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

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 (published 6 June 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we rec

Inspection carried out on 24 April 2017

During a routine inspection

The Regard Partnership Limited - Eastbourne Road, is a care home providing social and residential care for up to nine adults with learning disabilities. On the day of our inspection there were nine people living in the home. People required different levels of support; some people required one to one staff support to meet their needs, particularly regarding behaviour that could challenge others. People had learning disabilities and other diverse and complex needs such as autism, downs syndrome, epilepsy and limited verbal communication. The provider runs a number of care homes locally and is also a national provider of care. At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Although there was a registered manager in post, they had moved to manage another location within the organisation. 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. A new acting manager had been appointed and had started working in the home seven weeks before our inspection. They had submitted their application for registration. The registered manager was supporting the new manager in their induction to the home and both were present on the day of inspection.

There were good recruitment procedures and enough staff to meet people’s individual needs and wishes. Staff knew how to safeguard people from abuse and what they should do if they thought someone was at risk. Risks to individuals were well managed and people were able to stay safe without having their freedoms restricted. People’s independence was well promoted. Incidents and accidents were well managed. People’s medicines were managed safely.

People’s needs were effectively met because staff had the training and skills they needed to do so. Staff were supported well with induction, training, supervision and appraisal. 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 enough to eat and drink. Food was homemade and nutritious and people had been involved in making decisions about menus. Everyone was supported to maintain good physical and mental health. Appropriate referrals were made to health care professionals when needed.

People were treated with dignity and respect by kind and caring staff. Staff had a good understanding of the care and support needs of people and had developed positive relationships with people. There was a friendly and relaxed atmosphere in the home.

There was good leadership in the home and the acting manager ensured all staff were clear about their individual roles and responsibilities. The organisation had effective systems to monitor and review the quality of the care provided.

The service has met all of the fundamental standards and the acting manager and staff have maintained a consistently good service. Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection carried out on 31 March 2015

During a routine inspection

We inspected The Regard Partnership Limited - Eastbourne Road on 31 March 2015. This was an unannounced inspection. The Regard Partnership Limited - Eastbourne Road, is a care home providing social and residential care for nine adults with learning disabilities.

On the day of our inspection there were eight people living in the home, who required different levels of support. Some people required one to one staff support while others needed additional help and support to meet their needs, particularly regarding behaviour that could challenge others. People had learning disabilities and other diverse and complex needs such as autism, downs syndrome, bipolar, epilepsy and limited verbal communication.

Although there was no registered manager in post on the day of the inspection, an acting manager, who was experienced and knowledgeable in the care of people with learning disabilities, had recently been appointed. They confirmed that their application to register with CQC was currently being processed. It was subsequently confirmed that, following completion of this process, a decision had been made to register the 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.

People’s needs were assessed and their care plans provided staff with clear guidance about how they wanted their individual needs met. Care plans we looked at were person centred and contained appropriate risk assessments. They were regularly reviewed and amended as necessary to ensure they reflected people’s changing support needs.

There were procedures in place to keep people safe and there were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Staff were appropriately trained and told us they had completed training in safe working practices. They were knowledgeable about people’s care and support needs and we saw that care was provided with patience and kindness and people’s privacy and dignity was respected.

Safe recruitment procedures were followed and appropriate pre-employment checks had been made including written references, Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, and evidence of identity had also been obtained.

Medicines were stored and administered safely and handled by staff who had received appropriate training to help ensure safe practice.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed and records were accurately maintained to ensure people were protected from risks associated with eating and drinking. People were adequately supported to ensure they received enough to eat and drink. People had been supported by staff to have their healthcare needs met. Where risks to people had been identified these had been appropriately monitored and referrals made to relevant professionals, where necessary.

Staff received Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) training to make sure they knew how to protect people’s rights. The manager told us that to ensure the service acted in people’s best interests, they maintained regular contact with social workers, health professionals, relatives and advocates. The manager had recently made Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLs) applications to the local authority and was awaiting responses.

Activities reflected people’s individual interests and preferences. We saw people were encouraged and regularly supported to access facilities and amenities in the local community.

There was a formal complaints process. The provider recognised not all people could necessarily raise formal complaints and their feedback was sought through regular involvement with their keyworker. People were encouraged and supported to express their views about their care and staff were responsive to their comments.

The organisation’s values were embedded within the service and staff practice. The manager told us they monitored awareness and understanding of the culture of the service by observation, discussion and working alongside staff. Staff said they were encouraged to question practice and changes had taken place as a result. The manager assessed and monitored the quality of service provision through regular audits, including health and safety and medication. Satisfaction questionnaires were used to obtain the views of who lived in the home, their relatives and other stakeholders.

Inspection carried out on 5 August 2013

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. Some people using the service had complex needs, which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. Those who could tell us said they were very happy living at Eastbourne Road.

One person told us, �I like my room, I like spending time there.� Another said, �We have great fun on the Wii, we take it in turns and have a laugh.� One person said, �We decide what we want to do when we have our keyworker meetings.�

A visitor to the home told us, �It�s a safe and happy home. I would know if my (relative) was unhappy in anyway.�

We found care plans clearly documented the needs of people and how they should be met. Where appropriate, specialist advice and support was obtained. People�s representatives were involved in decisions about care and treatment.

The home was well maintained and people�s bedrooms had been personalised. There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty and staff felt well supported. There were systems in place to ensure that anyone who wanted to make a complaint could do so.

Inspection carried out on 15 November 2012

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. Some people using the service had complex needs, which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. Those who could, told us they were very happy with the standard of care provided.

One person told us, �I like it here because it is close to where I work, close to my family and to clubs that I go to.� They also said that staff spent time with them discussing their care plan and what should be included. Another person said that they liked their bedroom, �I chose the colour and I like how it looks.� They said �I have plenty of activities to go to and I like the Friday club.�

We found that care plans clearly documented the needs of people and how they should be met. Care was based on the individual needs of people and where appropriate, specialist advice and support was obtained. People using the service and/or their representatives were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. The provider had systems in place to continually monitor and improve the service.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)