Archived: Ellasdale Road

Updated 11 August 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the registered manager is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 24 June 2016 and was unannounced. One inspector undertook the inspection.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. We reviewed information we held about the service, including previous inspection reports and notifications of significant events the registered manager sent to us. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send to us by law. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during the inspection.

On the day of our inspection we met with four people living at the service. Due to the nature of people’s complex needs, we were not able to ask direct questions. We did however, observe people as they engaged with their day-to-day tasks and activities.

. We looked around the premises and saw the communal areas of the home, activity areas and three people’s bedrooms.

We also spoke with two relatives, three care staff and the deputy manager. We spent time observing people in the communal living areas. Following the visit, we also contacted two health care professionals to seek their views.

We looked at the care plans and associated records for two people. We reviewed other records, including the registered manager’s internal checks and audits, staff training records, staff rotas, accidents, incidents and complaints. Records for four staff were reviewed, which included checks on newly appointed staff and staff supervision records.

The service was last inspected on 16 September 2013 when no concerns were identified.

Updated 11 August 2016

The inspection took place on 24 June 2016 and was unannounced.

Ellasdale Road is a residential care home, which provides care and support for up to six adults who have learning disabilities and autism diagnoses. There were six people living at the home at the time of our inspection. They had a range of complex care needs associated with living with autism. People had complex communication needs and required staff who knew them well to meet their needs.

Ellasdale Care Home is a semi - detached three storey home. All bedrooms were single occupancy. There were two communal lounges, a separate dining room and kitchen.

A registered manager was 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. The registered manager was not available on the day of the inspection.

Staff were trained in adult safeguarding procedures and knew what to do if they considered people were at risk of harm or if they needed to report any suspected abuse. People told us they felt safe at the home.

Systems were in place to identify risks and protect people from harm. Risk assessments were in place and reviewed monthly. Where someone was identified as being, at risk, actions were identified on how to reduce the risk and referrals were made to health professionals as required.

Accidents and incidents were accurately recorded and were assessed to identify patterns and triggers. Records were detailed and included reference to actions taken following accidents and incidents. Reference was also made to behaviours, observations and other issues that may have led to an accident or incident.

Policies and procedures were in place to ensure the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. Medicines were managed, stored, given to people as prescribed and disposed of safely.

Staffing numbers were adequate to meet the needs of people living at the home. The provider used a dependency tool to determine staff allocation. This information was reviewed following incidents where new behaviours were observed which might increase or change people's dependency level.

Safe staff recruitment procedures ensured only those staff suitable to work in a care setting was employed.

The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff sought people’s consent about arrangements for their care.

Staff were skilled in working with people who had Autism. Training included autism awareness, communication and supporting challenging behaviours.

Food was produced using fresh ingredients, to a high standard and offered good choice. People could choose to eat in the dining room or other areas of the home. Drinks were provided at regular intervals and on request.

People had access to healthcare professionals when they needed it. This included GP's, dentists, opticians and psychiatrists.

Staff were caring, knew people well, and treated people in a dignified and respectful way. Staff acknowledged people's privacy. Staff had positive working relationships with people.

Staff knew people's individual needs and were able to describe to us how to provide care to people that matched their assessed needs. People were fully involved in the assessment of their needs and in care planning to meet those needs. We could see for ourselves that care was given in line with the guidance in people's care plans.

People were supported to attend a range of activities based on their individual needs and wishes. Relatives told us they could visit when they wanted and that there were good communication links with the home.

Staff listened and acted on what people said and there were opportunities for people to contribute to how the service was organised. People knew how to raise any concerns.

The views of people, relatives, health and social care professionals were sought as part of the quality assurance process.

Quality assurance systems were in place to regularly review and improve the quality of the service that was provided.