We carried out a review of the data available to us about St Aidans on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about St Aidans, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice:
The service was clean. Staff wore PPE correctly and there were signs around the home to remind people of the measures in place to reduce the risk of cross infection. A room had been set aside on each wing of the service for the use of staff to put on and take off PPE. Staff had completed training in infection prevention and control and the safe use of PPE.
The provider had a risk assessment in place which identified the action staff and people using the service should take to reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19. The use of the environment had been adapted to enable people using the service to comply with social distancing requirements. Staff were allocated to work only with one person during each shift to reduce the risk of cross infection.
The provider had services and processes in place to support staff with their health and well-being. They had recently developed an infection prevention control policy to guide staff about how to manage the risk of cross infection in services registered with the Care Quality Commission.
We found the service was not following government guidance in relation to the admission of people to St Aidans or the testing of staff, people using the service and professional visitors. Since the service was currently closed to admissions, we did not find any evidence people had been harmed as a result of these shortfalls. Immediately following the inspection, we were assured action had been taken to ensure the service was following all relevant guidance before it reopened to overnight guests.
At the last inspection in August 2015 the service was rated as ‘Good’.
At this inspection we found the service remained 'Good'.
The inspection visit took place on 13 October 2017 and was announced.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection who had been appointed in registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in July 2015. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 using the service and their relatives told us that people were safe and well treated. During the inspection we saw that people appeared happy and content and not at risk of harm.
Safeguarding adult’s procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported from abuse and appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work. People were being supported to have a healthy balanced diet. People’s medicines were managed safely and they received their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.
Staff had received training specific to the needs of people using the service, for example, mental health awareness and safeguarding adults. They received regular supervision and an annual appraisal of their work performance. The registered manager and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
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’s relatives and health care professionals had been involved in planning for their care needs. Care plans and risk assessments provided clear information and guidance for staff on how to support people to meet their needs. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible and to do things they wanted to do.
The registered manager recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service provided to people. The provider sought the views of relatives of people using the service, staff and health care professionals through annual surveys and regular meetings. They used feedback from these events to make improvements at the home. Staff said they enjoyed working at the home and they received good support from the registered manager.
People and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The complaint’s procedure was available and people said they were encouraged to raise concerns.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
St Aidans is a purpose built home which provides a short break service for adults with a learning disability. The service can accommodate up to six people, either as a planned admission or for care in an emergency. There were three people staying at the service on the day of the inspection with two more people being admitted later in the day.
We last inspected this service in April 2014 when the service met all the regulations we inspected.
The service had a registered 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We looked at staff files and the training matrix. We found staff were robustly recruited, received induction and support when they commenced work, trained in topics relevant to the service and were in sufficient numbers to meet people’s needs.
There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Staff were trained in infection control and provided with the necessary equipment and hand washing facilities to help protect their health and welfare.
People told us the food served at the home was good and they were offered choices about what they ate. We saw there was a good supply and choice of food.
We found the ordering, storage, administration and disposal of medication was safe.
Staff had completed training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) so they should know when an application needs to be made and how to submit one.
Electrical and gas equipment was serviced and maintained. There was a system for repairing faults or replacing equipment. Fire alarms were serviced and tested regularly should an emergency occur.
People had an individual emergency evacuation plan and there was a business continuity plan to keep people safe in an emergency.
There were individual risk assessments to keep people safe and evidence that the service contacted healthcare specialists for advice or equipment when required.
We toured the building and found the home to be warm, clean and fresh smelling. Furniture and equipment was suitable to the needs of people who used the service and there was a homely atmosphere.
Plans of care were individual to each person and had been regularly reviewed to keep staff up to date with any changes to people’s needs. People’s choices and preferred routines had been documented for staff to provide individual care.
People who used the service were able to join in activities if they wished.
We observed that staff were caring and protected people’s privacy and dignity when they gave personal care. Staff were observed to have a good rapport with people.
Policies and procedures were updated and management audits helped managers check on the quality of the service.
People who used the service were able to voice their opinions and tell staff what they wanted regularly over the telephone and by completing surveys. People who used the service were also able to raise any concerns if they wished.
We saw the manager analysed incidents, accidents and compliments to improve the service or minimise risks.
This was a respite or emergency care service for people with a learning disability. There were two people accommodated at the home. We talked to a family member of a person who used the service who was not at the home on the day of the visit and looked at quality assurance survey forms to help us gain a better judgement of the care home.
Is the service safe?
People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. A person who used the service said she felt safe and a family member said, "She feels safe. They provide female staff to look after her which I think is important". Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. We saw that there were effective systems on the prevention of or reporting possible abuse.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. We saw that managers conducted audits on concerns, incidents, compliments and complaints to help improve the service. We noted no complaints had been made despite the regular contact with people who used the service or their families to ask their views.
A person who used the service told us, "The home is clean and tidy. I help to keep my room clean". A family member said, "The rooms are very nice. It is beautiful here. The home is very clean and tidy". The service was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly therefore not putting people at unnecessary risk. We saw that electrical and fire equipment had been maintained in the office and fire drills were conducted in the home.
Staff we spoke with and from the documents we looked at we saw that staff had been trained in mandatory topics such as health and safety, first aid, food hygiene, fire awareness, moving and handling, infection control and the administration of medication. Staff were sufficiently trained to deliver effective care
Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. We saw that people had health care plans to keep their care up to date. Staff regularly contacted people who used their service or a family member to help keep care and social needs up to date and amended plans for people's next visit. A person who used the service told us, "The care I get is the care I need. I agreed to the care I get. I have been well looked after". A family member said, "I have come to review the care plan. The care plan is what my daughter needs. I have agreed to the care she gets. My daughter loves it here. She likes coming which makes me happy. She feels very safe here". Quality assurance survey forms showed us that people were satisfied with the service they received. People we spoke with were very satisfied with the care they received.
People who used the service were supported to make decisions and helped with their finances if it was required. We saw that one person who used the service was supported to go shopping for her own needs. She was being supported to move into more independent living by staff who were familiar with her needs.
Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.
Is the service caring?
A person who used the service told us,"The staff are very nice. They know what they are doing. They are very friendly. My stay here has been very happy and I have enjoyed it". A family member said, "The staff are very nice, wonderful and helpful. They keep me up to date with her care. I am very happy with the care and support I get, I get a break". People were supported by kind and attentive staff.
People who used the service, their family, friends and other professionals were asked about their views of the care home. This included an annual survey which we looked at and saw the positive results. The provider used the comments and surveys to improve the service.
People had what the service called 'personal care plans'. The plans contained very detailed past histories. The information gave staff an insight into people's likes and dislikes, their aspirations for the future and how staff could help them attain their goals. We saw that staff were careful to meet the ethnicity of people who used the service by providing suitable meals, staff who were aware of special religious or cultural support and respecting people's choices such as supporting a person to be vegetarian. Care was provided in accordance with people's diverse needs, which included any religious or ethnic needs.
One person who used the service told us, "I can get a drink when I want. The food is very good and they cater for me being a vegetarian. I get good variety and it's my choice. I am lactose intolerant and they make sure I eat healthily". A family member said, "They give her the correct food for her cultural needs. There are staff who are the same religion and they could offer instruction about my daughters needs if necessary". Plans of care showed people's choices and needs were recorded around their nutrition. A staff member said, "Where possible our role is to support people who use the service to prepare and make meals. It is their choice of what they eat and we would only interfere and seek help if we thought their diet was unhealthy". People were given sufficient food and drink to maintain their nutritional needs.
Is the service responsive?
People who used the service had a wide range of interests and hobbies recorded in their plans of care. One person who used the service told us, "I go shopping, to the cinema or ten pin bowling, we have meals out, do jigsaws and play computer games. We also go to places I like such as Clitheroe or places with animals". A family member said, "She goes out to bowling, cinemas and shopping. They take her to her appointments that she would have if she was at home". People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly.
The service conducted surveys and contacted people who used the service on a regular basis to ensure they received the care they needed.
Is the service well-led?
We saw that the service worked well with other agencies and organisations. We saw that meetings with professionals were arranged if it was necessary. On the day of the inspection a family member was in the home discussing the care of her daughter for the next time she visited.
The service had quality assurance systems in place and records showed that people who used the service and other organisations were happy with the service provided. Staff we spoke with felt supported. A member of staff said, "We have a good staff team and work together". Staff meetings gave staff the chance to voice their opinion about how the service was run and how to help improve care. As a result the quality of the service was continually improving.
We saw that staff were well trained and understood their roles. Staff also had access to a copy of the Skills for Care codes of conduct. This document guides staff on how to lead other staff and what is expected of each individual. This helped to ensure people received a good quality service at all times.
We reviewed the care files of four people who used the service and found evidence that there were procedures in place to ensure, wherever possible, their consent was gained in relation to the care provided for them. Where a person was not able to provide consent, we saw that families and carers had provided information about how their care should be provided.
We found that care files contained individualised care plans which included detailed information for staff about how people wished their care and support needs to be met.
.We found evidence that there were effective systems in place for the safe administration of medicines.
We spoke with three members of staff who told us they felt well supported and confident in carrying out their responsibilities. We saw evidence that staff were appropriately qualified and provided with training relevant to their role.
We found that suitable arrangements were in place to manage an effective complaints process for identifying, receiving and handling complaints for people who used the service provided at St Aidans.
We spoke to four relatives who told us they had been involved in developing plans of care and were regularly updated. Relatives said, "They send out a form when she is coming home and we fill in any changes. They ring us up to check on how we are. Staff look after her very well" and "He comes in every two weeks or so. He likes coming here. He likes the activities. They give us a report sheet of how he has been. Where he has gone out".
All twelve professionals who answered a survey thought the health and well being of people who used the service was promoted. Two commented, "The service is very thorough and all the people who use the service have their health needs met" and "The staff at St Aidan's work with service users, families and health professionals to promote optimum health and well being".
Four relatives told us, "Staff look after her very well. She is pleased they treat her like an adult. I am very satisfied with the service.There is only one problem. We would like more visits but that is a positive thing", "I can relax knowing she is well looked after. It is very much how I look after her. I am very happy with the service, brilliant", "It was his first visit but he enjoyed it" and "It is nice and clean, well decorated. I do not have a bad thing to say about the place. If he does not like somewhere he would not go back. He loves it at St Aidan's". Relatives of people who used the service were very satisfied that their loved ones were well looked after.
People who used the service felt safe. One person was able to tell us he had enjoyed his stay.
We spoke to four relatives who told us, "The staff are very knowledgeable in how they look after her. There are enough staff to meet her needs", "There are sufficient staff but they are very good because they will let me know when I am booking a place if they think they have the right mix of staff and service user for her" and "They tend to give him the same care staff to look after him so he is used to them". Relatives thought there was a well trained staff team to meet the needs of people who used the service.
Two staff members questioned thought they were given sufficient training and support to fulfil their roles.
All twelve professionals who answered a survey thought the home functioned to a high level. Comments included, "The team are always willing to provide support in emergency situations if they arise and are person centred in their approach. The team do their best to promote independence and choice whilst taking account of available resources", "Staff are helpful, responsible and professional. They are open to advice and training around individuals needs. Each persons needs are reviewed each time the service is used and they are adaptable to meet any changes" and "The service was very supportive and eager to offer any help to myself. Extensive person centred plans are developed and re-evaluated regularly as needs change".
Four relatives told us the service were very good at contacting them and ensuring they provided quality care by updating any information about people who used the service. Comments included, "She is very happy with the service and so am I. Refreshing isn't it" and "I have no complaints. They accommodated her at short notice when I was ill".