Adams House

Updated 12 October 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider 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.

Inspection team

One inspector carried out this inspection.

Service and service type

The service is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information available to us about this service. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse; and we sought feedback from commissioners and professionals who work with the service. We assessed the information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager, the director, two team leaders and four support staff. We also spoke with four people and spent time observing other people completing their daily activities.

We looked at three people’s care records including medication administration records (MARs). We looked at two staff members records. We looked at records relating to the management of the service. These included accident and incident records, meeting minutes and quality assurance records.

After the inspection

We spoke with three close relatives via telephone.

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and further quality assurance records.

Updated 12 October 2019

About the service

Adams House is a residential care home providing personal care to 22 people living with a learning disability or mental health condition at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 24 people.

Adams House has several adapted bungalows and individual apartments within a large house situated on a campus style service in Sutton in Ashfield. People living in the bungalows have their own room and access to a range of shared facilities. They can also use a range of facilities in the grounds of the service.

The service takes note of 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.

The service is located on a campus style community and as such would not fit with current best practice guidance which suggests small local services, integrated with the community. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the use of individual buildings. Staff supporting people did not wear a uniform or any identifying clothing that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people, and people were supported to have access to local community facilities and services.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People received person-centred support and staff knew people very well. Plans were in place, that detailed how people wanted to be supported and we saw staff followed this guidance.

People were supported to build and maintain important personal relationships that mattered to them, with peers and relatives.

People were supported to be independent, their rights were respected and access to advocacy was available if required. Support was provided in a way that put the people and their preferences first. Information was readily available for people in the correct format for them, including easy read.

The environment was clean, and people chose colours and furniture for their own rooms and communal areas. During our inspection staff and relatives were helping re-decorate as several people were away on holiday with other staff members.

Medicines were managed well, safely administered and recorded accurately.

There were enough staff to support people and staff were always visible. Staff received support and a variety of appropriate training to meet people’s needs.

Individualised risk assessments were in place. Staff were confident they would raise concerns to safeguard people. Robust recruitment and selection procedures ensured suitable staff were employed.

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 were well supported to make informed choices and given the opportunity to make decisions about their care and support.

Appropriate healthcare professionals were included in people’s care and support as and when this was needed. Staff supported people to maintain a healthy diet and, when required, follow a specialist diet.

People were supported to engage in activities they enjoyed, and we saw the service promoted people accessing local community facilities and supporting them to go on trips and holidays.

There were systems in place for communicating with staff, people and their relatives to ensure they were fully informed this was via team meetings, phone calls and emails. People had good links to the local community through regular access to local services.

Audits and monitoring systems were used effectively to manage the service and to make improvements as and when required.

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 9 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.