We carried out a review of the data available to us about Family Investment (Four) Limited 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 Family Investment (Four) Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Family Investment (Four) Limited is a care home that provides accommodation and personal care support for up to eight adults with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection the home was fully occupied.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service
The home was rated Outstanding in caring at our last inspection. The service continued to be Outstanding in the way they cared for people. Staff were highly motivated and offered people care and support that was exceptionally compassionate and kind. There was a visible person-centred culture at the home. Staff had a clear understanding of people’s needs and had developed positive relationships with them and their family members. Staff were very supportive and sensitive when supporting people to follow their diverse wishes and preferences.
The home was also Outstanding at responding to people’s needs. The service was exceptional in the way they supported people to learn new skills and maintain their independence. People planned for activities that met their needs and preferences and they were supported to follow their interests. A social care professional said they liked the way people’s independence was promoted in positive ways.
The service had safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. Appropriate recruitment checks had taken place before staff started work and there were enough staff available to meet people’s care and support needs. People’s medicines were managed safely. Risks to people had been assessed to ensure their needs were safely met. The service had procedures in place to reduce the risk of infections.
People’s care and support needs were assessed before they started to use the service. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people appropriately. Staff were supported through induction, training and regular supervision. People were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet and had access to health care professionals when they needed them. 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 and their relatives (where appropriate) had been consulted about their care and support needs. The service had a complaints procedure in place. There were procedures in place to make sure people had access to end of life care and support if it was required.
The registered manager had worked in partnership with health and social care providers to plan and deliver an effective service. The provider took people and their relatives views into account through satisfaction surveys. Staff enjoyed working at the home and said they received good support from the registered manager.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 23 February 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Family Investment (Four) Limited provides accommodation with personal care for up to 8 adults with a learning disability. The shareholders and directors of Family Investment (Four) Limited are family members or guardians of the people who live there. The directors hold regular meetings to discuss all aspects of the service and any surplus monies go back into improvements. There were 8 people living at the service at the time of the inspection. Each person has their own en-suite room and share the lounge, conservatory and kitchen/diner. The service is situated in a rural area, with good links to Folkestone and Canterbury. It has its own garden with a patio.
A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.
Staff knew how to identify and report any safeguarding concerns in order to help people keep safe.
A robust recruitment procedure meant checks were carried out on all staff before they supported people, to ensure that they were suitable for their role.
There were enough staff who were sufficiently qualified and competent to support the people at the service. Staff had worked at the service for a number of years and so helped ensure consistency of care.
There were safe systems in place for the storage, administration and disposal of medicines. Staff received regular training in how to administer medicines safely and people were encouraged to take responsibility for their own medicines.
Potential risks of harm in the environment and for people when carrying out their daily lives had been identified and guidance was in place as to how the risk of harm could be reduced.
A schedule of cleaning was in place to ensure the service was clean and practices were in place to minimise the spread of any infection.
Staff felt well supported by each other and the management team. There was a rolling programme of essential training to ensure staff had the skills and knowledge to care for people effectively.
People had their health needs assessed and these were effectively monitored. People were responsible for planning, shopping and cooking their own food and took this in turns.
CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The service understood when to make an application, but had not needed to do so.
Staff were extremely kind, caring and compassionate, and enjoyed spending time with people. The service was run on ‘family values’ and there were positive relationships with people based on equality and understanding people’s individual and emotional needs. People were supported to maintain links with individuals who were important to them such as family and friends. People were actively involved in making all decisions that affected their daily lives, including recruiting new staff.
People understood that information about their care, treatment and support needs were contained in their plans of care. This information included what was important to people and their choices and preferences. Staff knew people well which enabled them to support people in a personalised way.
The service prioritised ensuring people had active fulfilling lives. People undertook a variety of educational, creative and work based activities which reflected their interests and abilities.
People’s views were sought in a variety of ways and they felt able to raise any concerns with staff. Information was available about how to follow the complaints process, should they need to use it.
The registered manager was approachable and the atmosphere in the service was relaxed and informal. The registered manager was supported by a staff team who understood the aims of the service and were motivated to support people according to their choices and preferences.
Systems were in place to review the quality of the service and any shortfalls identified were addressed. Feedback was sought from people who lived at the service and the results were that people were highly satisfied with the care provided.
People said they were settled in the home and liked the staff who they knew well. One person said, 'We go out to different places and it's good fun,' Another person said, 'We have our ups and downs, we all get on well and we all help each other out.'
There were sufficient numbers of staff available to support people with their chosen lifestyle. Staff said it was a good place to work and they worked well as a team. We saw good interactions between people using the service and the staff.
The home was safe, well maintained and suited people's needs. Each bedroom was single and reflected people's preferences and interests. The home had clear well organised documentation and records.