Background to this inspection
Updated
27 January 2016
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.
This inspection took place on 7 October 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector, so that the inspection process would not impact upon people’s normal daily routines and activities.
The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We received the completed document just prior to our visit and reviewed the content to help focus our planning and determine what areas we needed to look at during our inspection.
Prior to this inspection we also reviewed all the additional information we held about the service, including data about safeguarding and statutory notifications. Statutory notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.
During our inspection, we observed how staff interacted and engaged with the person who used the service during individual tasks and activities.
We spoke with one person, and one relative. We spoke with four healthcare professionals, the registered manager, two care staff, the operational manager and two members of the administration and human resources staff. We also spoke with the local authority and clinical commissioning group to gain their feedback as to the care that people received.
We looked at one person’s care records to see if their records were accurate and reflected their needs. We reviewed three staff recruitment files, staff duty rotas, training records and further records relating to the management of the service, including quality audits and health and safety checks.
Updated
27 January 2016
Alderwood LLA Ltd Ecton Park provides accommodation, personal care and support for one person with a high functioning learning disability and autistic spectrum disorder. It is situated in a residential part of Northampton.
The inspection took place on 7 October 2015.
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 legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We found a really positive, caring and progressive atmosphere within the service. The person who lived at the service was placed at the very heart of the delivery of care. All aspects of support had been centred on them and their needs. There was lots of good humoured and jovial chat, with kind and trusting relationships evident between staff and the person. The person who lived in the service had been involved in the planning of their care. They told us they felt fully included in discussions about all aspects, being able to have their say at each step of the way. Staff were very enthusiastic about their work and driven by a desire to provide high quality care. They were flexible and adaptable, ensuring that the person participated in their own care and achieved their full potential, helping them to lead a meaningful life, doing things that were important to them. The provider philosophy was that people should be able to access the best of everything in life and have ample opportunities to achieve their goals.
The service was led by a committed, dedicated and passionate registered manager, who was well supported by a strong and positive management structure within the provider organisation. The culture within the service was open, optimistic and encouraging; staff were proud to work for the service and wanted it to be the best it could. Staff and the registered manager were highly motivated and very committed to their work; they faced up to challenges that arose and used these to improve things. They had strong values and a shared vision, and strived to give people positive care experiences and provide high quality care.
Staff attended regular meetings, which gave them an opportunity to share ideas, and exchange information about possible areas for improvements to the registered manager. Ideas for change were welcomed by the registered manager and provider, and used to drive improvements and make positive changes for people. Quality monitoring systems and processes were used robustly to make positive changes, drive future improvement and identify where action needed to be taken. All staff told us they wanted standards of care to remain high and so used the outcome of audit checks and questionnaires to enable them to provide excellent quality care.
The person who lived in the service felt secure and we observed that they were calm and relaxed in the presence of staff. Staff had a positive approach towards keeping them safe and demonstrated a strong awareness of what constituted abuse. They understood the relevant safeguarding procedures to be followed in reporting potential abuse. Staff were committed to managing fluctuating risk factors and had a good understanding of how to support the person when they became anxious or distressed. Potential risks had been identified, and detailed plans implemented to enable the person to live as safely and independently as possible.
Robust recruitment checks took place in order to establish that staff were safe to work with people before they commenced employment. There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people’s care and support needs and to enable them to do the things they enjoyed. People received their medication as prescribed. Safe systems and processes were in place to protect people from the risks associated with medication.
Staff received regular training, based upon best practice in autism, which provided them with the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs in a person centred manner. They were well supported by the registered manager and senior management team in respect of supervision and appraisal which enabled them to remain motivated and responsive to people’s individual needs.
Staff sought people’s consent before they provided care and support. Where people were unable to make certain decisions about their care, the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were followed. Where people had restrictions placed upon them, staff ensured people’s rights to receive care that met their needs was protected, and that any care and treatment was provided in the least restrictive way.
People were supported to access suitable amounts of good quality, nutritious food. A variety of meal options were available, which included specific health and cultural dietary requirements. We found that the person who lived in the service was encouraged and supported to participate in meal preparation as part of developing their life skills. Referrals to health and social care professionals were made when appropriate to maintain people’s health and well-being. Staff worked closely with other professionals to ensure people’s needs were fully met.
The person who lived in the service told us they had been supported to develop life skills and gain independence, using individually created development programmes. The support for this was provided by a highly skilled staff group, who shared a strong person centred ethos and were dedicated to helping people lead a fulfilled and enriched live. The person and their relatives expressed their delight at the progress they had made since coming to the service, which was often far beyond the level of achievement they had previously hoped for. Staff used innovative ways to support people to move forward, adapting when their needs changed. They had a strong understanding of people’s interests and hobbies and accessed a wide range of activities that were tailored to people’s individual needs. The person who lived in the service had been actively supported to integrate within the local community, using local facilities to avoid social isolation. To facilitate this, the service had developed links with local colleges, libraries and local employers offering work experience.