Archived: Meadow Rise

Meadow Rise is a residential care home that was providing personal and nursing care to four people with a learning disability at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People at Meadow Rise usually received a personalised service that met their needs. Relatives gave positive feedback about the care but felt constant staff changes were impacting on the service. Supporting people to communicate their needs and choices was a strength of the home. People had positive relationships with the staff team and they interacted well with each other.

Relatives and staff told us the home was safe. New staff were recruited safely. Accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns were monitored and investigated thoroughly. The home was clean, modern and well decorated in line with people’s preferences. Medicines were managed effectively and staff worked to reduce people’s reliance on some medicines.

Staff were very well supported and completed the training they needed. 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. Staff supported people to have a healthy diet and to access external healthcare services.

People’s needs were fully assessed. The information was used to develop detailed and personalised care plans. People were engaged in activities meaningful to them and had opportunities to access their local community.

The home was well-led with staff and relatives giving positive feedback about the registered manager. The provider had effective quality assurance checks which were successful in identifying areas for improvement. There were good opportunities for relatives and staff to provide feedback.

More information is in our full report.

Rating at last inspection:

Good (the last report was published on 17 June 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor this service and inspect in line with our reinspection schedule for services rated good.

We previously inspected the service on 4 December 2013 and found the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations we inspected against.

Meadow Rise is registered to provide residential care and support for up to four adults with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were three people living in the home.

The home had a registered manager who had been in post since 29 July 2014. They had taken up a new role in September 2016 as an assistant operation manager and was no longer based at the service. However, the registered manager visited the service regularly each week and worked closely with the service manager. The service manager told us they were in the process for applying for registration and would be taking over the responsibility. 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.

Relatives told us their family members were happy living at Meadow Rise and they felt safe. Staff showed a good understanding of safeguarding adults and were confident of how to keep people safe.

Risk assessments were in place for people when required with clear links to care and support plans. General risk assessments regarding the premises and environment were available.

Medicines were managed safely, effectively and in a way which reflected people’s individual needs. All records were up to date and fully completed, with medicine audits being carried out regularly.

Staff were recruited in a safe and consistent manner with all appropriate checks carried out. Staffing levels were consistent with people’s needs and reduced accordingly on weekends and during holiday periods when people were spending some time away from the home.

Staff had up to date training in autism, safeguarding, Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) for people who lacked capacity to make a decision and deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) to make sure people were not restricted unnecessarily.

People were supported to maintain a balanced and healthy diet, and to attend any health services when required.

The service manager and staff we spoke to had a good understanding of the MCA and DoLS. Best interest decisions were evident within care files.

Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals. Staff told us they felt supported in their roles and they could approach the service manager if they had any issues or concerns.

The service provided personalised care. Staff had good knowledge of each person and knew how to support them in a way that met their specific needs. Relatives told us they felt people were looked after and well cared for in the home.

Each person had a weekly planner of activities they took part in to meet their social needs and interests as well as to promote their independent living skills.

Staff were aware of how people might communicate if they were unhappy with a situation.

Relatives felt involved in care planning and knew how to make a complaint or comment. The service had never received a complaint.

Relatives and staff felt the service was well run and the home was well managed. The atmosphere in Meadow Rise was calm, open and friendly.

Staff felt supported in their roles and were kept informed and updated in relation to any changes in the service and with the registered provider.

The provider had a quality assurance system to check the quality and safety of the service provided, and were effective in identifying issues and areas that required improvement.

We were able to observe the experiences of people who used the service. For instance, we spent time with people as they had their breakfasts and lunches and observed how staff supported and encouraged them. We saw staff encouraged people to make their own choices and decisions. We saw staff understood each person's different needs, for example, when they required additional support.

We saw that staff supported people to make choices about how they spent their day and the range of activities offered. On the day of our visit some of the people who used the service went out to the bank, the shops and a leisure club for swimming. We saw staff had supported people as they got ready to go out.

We observed that staff treated people with dignity and respect. We saw that people had freedom of movement around their home and could spend time in their bedrooms whenever they wanted. We saw that each person had their own bedroom which was personalised. We saw the provider had made suitable adaptations to meet the people's physical needs.

Staff told us how they respected people's privacy and knocked before they entered their rooms. We saw that the people who used the service related well with the staff. We saw that the staff communicated well and appropriately with people in a way that was easily understood. We saw that staff were attentive and interacted well with people. One relative of a person who used the service told us, 'I am delighted with the support my relative receives, the staff really have his best interests at heart.' We learned more about how care and treatment that was provided when we talked with staff, observed their practices and looked at the records of the four people who used the service.

The manager had carried out a survey of people who used the service, in which everyone said that the care at the home was good and that they felt safe.

We found that people were encouraged and supported to make their own choices and found there was detailed care and support information in place for people using the service.

We found that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider had acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

We found that people who used the service had their care and welfare needs met.

We found that staff had been well supported to deliver care and treatment safely.

We found that people's views were important and listened to. We found that there was an effective complaints system in place.

During our visit, all interactions we observed between the staff and the people living at the home were open, respectful and courteous.

We saw that staff provided whatever was wanted in a way that demonstrated a good knowledge of each individual person. Where appropriate, we saw staff providing support and encouragement to the people to do things as independently as possible.

We observed people being spoken with and supported in a sensitive, respectful and professional manner. We saw that staff included people living at the home in the day to day running of the home and that, whenever possible, it was the people living at the home that made decisions on what happened through the day and when. We saw that people's needs were met in a calm and unhurried way, with enough staff available to meet any needs as they arose.