14 June 2018
During a routine inspection
Clervaux Trust is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. 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. Clervaux Trust can accommodate up to three people. At the time of the inspection, there were three people using the service. One person needed support to attend to their personal care and another person lacked capacity to make decisions and needed verbal support from staff to assist them to manage their day-to-day activities.
This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
The registered manager had recently left the service and the new manager was in the process of becoming registered with CQC. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC to manage the service. Like 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.
We last inspected the service in October 2015 and rated the service as ‘Good’ overall.
Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and risk assessments were in place. The manager understood their responsibilities around safeguarding and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.
Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves. Support plans were in place that recorded people’s plans and wishes for their life.
Care records showed that people’s needs were assessed before they started using the service.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. We discussed how records could be enhanced to reflect the choices people made. The manager ensured measures were in place to assist staff evidence people’s choices and reflect any ‘best interests’ decisions.
People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and staff were aware of people’s nutritional needs. Care records contained evidence of people being supported during visits to and from external health care specialists.
Activities were arranged for people who used the service based on their likes and interests and to help meet their social needs. People had access to a wide range of meaningful activities such as farming, animal care, pottery, woodwork, metal work and textile production at the provider’s farm.
Appropriate arrangements were in place for the safe administration and storage of medicines.
There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet the needs of people who used the service. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.
The service was clean and suitable for the people who used it, and appropriate health and safety checks had been carried out.
The provider had an effective complaints procedure in place and people who used the service and family members were aware of how to make a complaint.
The provider had an effective quality assurance process in place. People who used the service, family members and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service via meetings and surveys.