You are here

Thorpe House Specialist Adult Mental Health Unit Limited Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 11 November 2016

The inspection of Thorpe House took place on 12 August 2016 and was unannounced. We interviewed the registered manager on 19 August 2016 as they were unavailable on the day of our inspection. The service was last inspected on 17 October 2013 and met the Health and Social Care Act 2008 Regulations in operation at that time.

Thorpe House Specialist Adult Mental Health Unit Limited is registered to provide accommodation/nursing care for people with mental health problems. The service is registered for 23 people. There were 20 people living there on the day of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in post who had been registered since 2011. 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.’

Staff had received training in how to keep people safe. All the staff we spoke with demonstrated they understood how to ensure people were safeguarded against abuse and they knew the procedure to follow to report any incidents.

The service had a positive approach to risk. They assessed how people could be supported to live the life they wanted and worked with people in an enabling way when independent living had been identified as an achievable goal. They encouraged people to identify and manage their own risks.

We found the environment to be maintained to a high standard and was extremely clean with good infection control practices in place. Staff were observed to follow good practice guidelines in the management and prevention of infections.

Staffing levels were determined to support people well with their physical, social and emotional needs. They worked an on call system to ensure when people’s needs changed at short notice; there were always staff on hand to assist. The service recognised the potential of a multi-disciplinary approach and the benefits this brought to the people using the service and the staffing complement included registered mental nurses, nursing assistants and occupational therapists.

The registered manager understood their obligations under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Mental Health Act 1983 and worked within the legislative frameworks. Staff had received training and were fully informed of any changes at team meetings to ensure they continued to provide care within the law.

People received care and support from a highly trained, motivated group of staff. Staff received an induction and training to ensure they had the skills to meet the needs of the people at Thorpe House. Staff were supported to continually develop by obtaining nationally recognised qualifications and by on-going supervision and appraisal. They were keen to develop new skills to provide the best level of support to people.

People told us how much they enjoyed their meals and they were given appropriate and sensitive support by care staff. People told us they were offered choice about what they wanted to eat, where they wanted to eat and at what time they wanted to eat, demonstrating the service was flexible in its approach.

Staff were responsive to people’s individual needs, preferences and wishes and were passionate about providing a high standard of care and support. The service was inclusive when plans were being drawn up to ensure outcomes were achieved.

Without exception, people, their relatives and professionals told us they were very happy with the caring approach and attitude of the staff team who they described as kind and friendly. We observed caring relationships had been built between staff and people using the service and some people told us they considered staff as friends.

We observed staff knocked on doors before entering people’s rooms, demonstrating staff respected people’s need for privacy. Confidentiality was r

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 11 November 2016

The service was safe

Staff we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of how to ensure people were safeguarded against abuse and they knew the procedure to follow to report any incidents.

Risks were managed at the service and there were systems and processes in place. The provider demonstrated their support of appropriate positive risk taking approaches. We found minor issues with the management of medicines, which the registered manager acted upon immediately.

Staffing levels were determined to support people adequately and appropriately.

Effective

Good

Updated 11 November 2016

The service was effective

People received care and support from a highly trained, motivated group of staff. Staff received an induction and training and were regularly supervised and supported to ensure they had the skills to meet the needs of the people at the home.

Staff fully understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Mental Health Act 1983 and ensured the service worked to the legislation.

Staff involved other professionals and worked in collaboration to ensure the service was effective in meeting the needs of the people using the service.

Caring

Outstanding

Updated 11 November 2016

The service was very caring.

People, their relatives and professionals all told us staff were extremely caring and compassionate in their approach and spoke very highly of staff at the service. All staff were passionate about improving the quality of life for people living at the service.

People were supported in a way that fully protected their privacy and dignity. There were dedicated dignity champions at the home to promote and develop staff in the practice of dignified care.

The home had an enabling and empowering ethos where people were actively encouraged to identify and achieve goals to enable them to live independent and fulfilled lives at the service or with the intention of returning to their previous living arrangements.

Responsive

Good

Updated 11 November 2016

The service was responsive.

Staff were focused on person-centred care and involved people in ways that encouraged and enabled people by working with them to find out what was important to them and how they wanted to be supported.

Activities formed an important part of people’s day and staff worked with people to plan their day to ensure whatever they chose to do brought meaning and fulfilment to their lives.

People knew who to complain to but told us they had no complaints about the service.

Well-led

Good

Updated 11 November 2016

The service was well-led

The service was continually striving to improve; they monitored what they did well and considered how they could improve. The registered provider financially invested in the service to ensure the home had the resources to be successful.

The registered provider had an effective system in place to assess and monitor the quality of service provided.

The service worked in partnership with the local authority and with local groups. They could see the benefits in working with others to continually improve the service they provided and to provide a high standard of service provision.