42 Beeston Drive

Updated 17 January 2019

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.

We gave the service 48 hour’s notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed information available to us about this service. The registered provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the registered provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed safeguarding alerts; share your experience forms and notifications that had been sent to us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

We reviewed records including; accident and incident logs, quality assurance records, compliments and complaints, policies and procedures, training records for all staff, and five records relating to staffing. We pathway tracked the care of three people. Pathway tracking is where we check that the care detailed in individual plans matches the experience of the person receiving care. We looked at three support plans and daily reports along with three medicine administration records

We completed observations in communal areas, due to the nature of people's needs, we were not able to ask everyone direct questions, but we did observe people as they engaged with their day-to-day tasks and activities.

We spoke with three relatives and attempted to contact a number of other family members. We spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager and four care staff. Additionally, we spoke with four professionals from the local authority who visited the people living at the service.

Updated 17 January 2019

42 Beeston Drive 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.

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.

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. However, we did find some areas that needed improving which have impacted on the rating of the Well Led Domain. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service overall remained Good.

Systems were in place to monitor and assess the quality and safety of the care provided. However, we found that these were not always robust enough to identify issues and action was not always taken. We made a recommendation that the registered provider review its quality monitoring and oversight of the service.

People were supported with diet and hydration. However, we made a recommendation that the registered provider undertake a full review of its menus as they were not healthy or nutritionally balanced.

Checks were undertaken as required with the safety and suitability of the premises in regards to cleanliness, gas, electricity and water. Fire Safety checks had been carried out but we made a recommendation for a further review of the safety and suitability of the evacuation plans.

People continued to receive safe care as they were supported by staff who knew how to protect them from harm. Staff were aware of people's individual risks and plans were in place to minimise these while maintaining the person's independence. Where areas for improvement were identified, systems were in place to ensure lessons were learnt and used to improve the service delivery. Staffing was arranged based on people's individual needs and what activities were happening . Staffing remained flexible to suit the people living at the service.

The registered manager supported staff by arranging training so staff developed the skills to provide care and support to people, which was in-line with best practice.Staff were supported to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively, so that people received care and support in-line with their needs and wishes.

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 receive care and support that was in line with their consent.

People were supported by staff who knew their individual requirements and how to support them in the right way. People had access to healthcare professionals when they required them. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People were treated well which had a positive impact on their well-being. We observed that all staff spoke kindly to them and they presented as being happy and comfortable. Staff helped people to make choices about their care and the views and decisions they had made about their care were listened

and acted upon. Information was provided to people should they wish to raise a complaint.There were opportunities for people and relatives to feedback their views about their care and this was used to improve the service.