The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Southview

Overall: Outstanding read more about inspection ratings

Station Road, Bow, Crediton, Devon, EX17 6HX (01363) 881093

Provided and run by:
Orchard View Care Services Limited

All Inspections

11 April 2018

During a routine inspection

This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 11 and 18 April 2018.

Southview is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for up to six adults. Southview is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

It is also registered to provide personal care in people’s own homes, such as for domiciliary care and supported living. The service is intended for people who have a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were six people living within Southview and 15 people were receiving a service within their own homes. The times of visits ranged from 30 minutes, up to four times per day to 24 hours per day.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

Staff were highly skilled and had a natural aptitude to give reassurance and comfort. They treated people with the utmost dignity and respect when helping them with daily living tasks.

People received exceptionally personalised care and support specific to their needs and preferences. There was an excellent understanding of seeing each person as an individual, with their own social needs.

The service strived to provide people and those that matter to them with rich and fulfilled lives. They had actively sourced new opportunities for people to connect with the world and with others. An innovative community project introduced since the last inspection was arranging for people to attend Exeter prison gym. Lots of work was undertaken to make this connection.

People were supported to have a peaceful, comfortable and dignified end of life care in line with national best practice guidance.

The provider was forward thinking. They provided strong leadership; was a good role model for all staff and drove up excellent practice to provide people with opportunities. They had established a service where staff were clear about the values and ethos of the service. It had a positive culture that was person-centred, open, inclusive and empowering. Staff were supported to reach their true potential.

Relatives, professionals and staff described the service in outstanding terms. A relative commented: “My sister spent many happy years at Southview. Southview was everything we could have wished for, happy, supportive, professional staff and management. A happy home. I would not only recommend Southview I would say it should be held up as a beacon of excellence.”

People felt safe and staff demonstrated a good understanding of what constituted abuse and how to report if concerns were raised. Measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible to protect people’s freedom. People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate legal processes. Medicines were safely managed on people’s behalf.

There were effective staff recruitment and selection processes in place. Staffing arrangements were flexible in order to meet people’s individual needs. Staff received a range of training and regular support to keep their skills up to date in order to support people appropriately.

The provider strived to provide the best possible service for people. A number of effective methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received and changes and improvements were made in response.

7, 13 and 15 October 2015

During a routine inspection

This unannounced inspection took place on 7 October 2015. We returned on 13 and 15 October 2015 as arranged with the registered manager.

Southview is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for up to six adults. It is also registered to provide personal care in people's own homes, such as for domiciliary care and supported living. The service is intended for people who have learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were eight people receiving a service from Southview. This included six people living within the residential accommodation.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People felt safe and staff demonstrated a good understanding of what constituted abuse and how to report if concerns were raised. Measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible to protect people’s freedom. People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate legal processes. Medicines were safely managed.

Care files were personalised to reflect people’s individual preferences. Their views and suggestions were taken into account to improve the service. They were supported to maintain a balanced diet, which they enjoyed. Health and social care professionals were regularly involved in people’s care to ensure they received the care and treatment which was right for them.

Staff relationships with people were strong, caring and supportive. Staff were motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and compassionate.

There were effective staff recruitment and selection processes in place. Staffing arrangements were flexible in order to meet people’s individual needs. Staff received a range of training and regular support to keep their skills up to date in order to support people appropriately. Staff spoke positively about communication and how the registered manager worked well with them, encouraged team working and an open culture.

A number of effective methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received.

27 November 2013

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we spent time talking to people who used the service, including those who received personal care in their own home. People told us they enjoyed living at Southview. Comments included 'I like it here, I have my own room.' Another person told us 'I have a new keyworker. I like the staff here.' We spoke with two relatives of people who lived at the home, following the inspection. They both expressed high level of satisfaction with the service offered. One relative said 'We couldn't be happier, staff are all very open, we trust them. One thing that speaks volumes is the continuity of staff. This is so important.'

We spent some time observing how care and support was being delivered. We also sat in on a house meeting to decide where they wanted to plan their next trip out. We found staff knew people's needs and ways of communicating. They were able to skilfully interpret people's non -verbal cues. We saw that pictures were being used to help people make decisions.

Care and support was being well planned by a staff group who understood the needs and wishes of people they worked with. Recruitment processes were robust to fully protect people. Complaints and concerns were taken seriously and staff worked with people to ensure their views were taken into account.

17 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We met five of the six people who lived at the home, all of whom had moved in over four years ago, and two people who received a personal care service. We observed some of the support they received. We also spoke with three care staff, the deputy manager and the home's office administrator.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Their privacy, dignity and independence were respected. Their views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was delivered in relation to their care. For example, they were offered choice and given information that helped them make choices.

People were supported by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. People we spoke with told us they felt staff looked after them and that they could tell them if something was wrong. We saw people approached staff freely or were not distressed by their presence. One person who used the service told us that they knew of two new staff and that they were both 'doing well.'

People were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. The provider also had systems to regularly monitor the quality of service that people received. However, these systems were not always effective in identifying and managing risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others.

21 December 2011

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out after we received information about the service, which we also discussed with other relevant health and social care professionals. We carried out an unannounced visit to the home, staying for eight hours. We met the six people who lived there, all of whom had moved in over three years ago. We also met one person's relative, the staff on duty over the day, and a visiting care professional. The registered manager was informed of our arrival and came to the home during the morning.

People living at the home were unable to comment directly on the service because of their needs. To get a fuller picture of their experiences and life at the home, we therefore also observed how people were supported, how staff engaged with them, how people spent their time, and looked at a variety of records. We also looked around the home, including the adjacent office and the activities building (where the laundry is also sited).

The provider is registered to provide personal care, such as for a domiciliary care service. The manager told us that at the time of our visit no service was being provided to anyone in their own home.

People were asked about food, activities and doing housework, for example. Their views, suggestions or requests were drawn up into an individual plan, which was discussed with them at the start of each week. Staff told us that weekly fire drills were held with everyone who lived at the home, which one person we spoke with confirmed.

For much of our visit, people were either in the activities room painting Christmas wall displays, or on outings with staff. Staff support was promptly organised to accommodate everyone's wishes. When drinks were served, people were offered the biscuit tin rather than staff just giving them biscuits; pictures were used to help people make choices for lunch.

People could be part of the community around the home. They were enabled to keep up links with their relatives, attended activities in Crediton or Exeter, and went shopping with staff support. The home had transport, but people also used public transport. We noted outings were more frequent Monday-Friday. Staff said this was because people were so busy in the week that they relaxed more at weekends. They had been on holiday elsewhere in the south west. Staff told us that everyone used to go on holiday together but now they went in smaller groups. This meant the holiday could be better tailored to people's age, for example. We found that people living at the home had sometimes paid for staff on outings, such as to buy them drinks. There was no information or guidance for people who used the service, or for staff, about such arrangements, which the manager told us she would rectify.

We saw staff using 'Makaton' signing to communicate with some people, who responded and who were encouraged to try to use it themselves. We heard staff give positive feedback when people's behaviour was appropriate for the occasion. Communication boards were also used, and one person responded positively when we talked about what their board showed about their coming day. People were encouraged to be physically and mentally active, such as through 'music & movement', swimming and drama. Their needs had been met through involvement of other health and social care professionals.

Service users' meetings were used to get people's views on the running of the home on a day-to-day basis. For example, they had been asked if they minded having a cat being in the home, which they said they did not; staff explained to us that it did not belong to the home but liked to come in. Menus had been discussed at another meeting.