The Vine House

We found the following examples of good practice.

Staff had training in the correct use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and followed current guidance. There was enough PPE available and areas for safely putting PPE on and off. Staff understood where to get further advice on best practice in relation to preventing the spread of infection and management of risks related to COVID-19.

People were supported by staff to keep their home clean and tidy and the home had no unpleasant odours. People and staff understood the need to prevent infection and told us they took part in regular testing to check for COVID-19.

Visitors to the home were asked to take a lateral flow test on the day and were encouraged to wear masks and sanitise their hands. There was lots of helpful signage and information posters about COVID-19 and how to reduce risks and stay safe.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were 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. Staff discussed with people the care and support they received and obtained their consent.

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.

People felt safe and were happy with the support they received. People had well developed care plans and staff supported them effectively to live an active life.

Staff were trained and their competency to deliver care and support people was observed by the registered manager. People and relatives were very positive about the service they received.

There were enough staff safely employed to meet people`s needs in a personalised way.

Staff respected people`s dignity and privacy. Staff enabled people to maintain and develop relationships and stay safe.

People had a well-developed activity schedule and staff supported them to enjoy activities in the home and in the community.

The provider`s governance systems and processes were well developed and used by the registered manager to constantly monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 16 June 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

The Vine House is registered to provide accommodation and support for two people with a learning disability. It is situated in Luton, close to local amenities. On the day of our visit, there were two people living in the service.

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.

Robust safeguarding procedures were in place and understood by staff. Where required, action was taken to keep people safe, minimising any risks to health and safety. Staff knew how to manage risks to promote people’s safety, and balanced these against people’s rights to take risks and remain independent. Risk assessments were in place and reviewed regularly, these enabled staff to minimise the potential for risks to occur.

There were adequate numbers of staff on duty to support people safely and ensure that they had opportunities to take part in activities and undertake their preferred daily routines. The provider had a robust recruitment process in place. Staff were not offered employment until appropriate checks had been satisfactorily completed.

Medicines were managed safely and the processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who lived at the service.

Staff were well supported through a system of induction and training based on the needs of the people who lived at the service, supervision, appraisal and on-going professional development.

People’s consent was gained before care and support was delivered. Staff understood the processes in place to protect people who could not make decisions and followed the legal requirements outlined in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberties Safeguards (DoLS).

People had a choice of meals and access to snacks and fluids throughout the day. Staff supported them to participate in food preparation when appropriate. People had access to health care professionals to make sure they received care and treatment to meet their individual healthcare needs. Staff followed advice given by professionals to make sure people received the treatment they needed.

People were relaxed, comfortable and happy with the staff that supported them. Positive relationships had been developed between people and staff who treated them with kindness and compassion. Staff were knowledgeable about how to meet people’s needs and understood how people preferred to be supported on a daily basis. Staff’s approach to people was to help maintain their skills and develop their independence.

Staff understood how to promote and protect people’s rights and maintain their privacy and dignity. Relationships with family members were considered important and staff supported people to maintain these.

Regular reviews of care enabled people’s care to be person centred and individual along with being monitored to ensure that it remained reflective of people’s current needs. People were able to take part in a varied range of activities which reflected their individual hobbies and interests.

People knew who to speak to if they wanted to raise a concern. There were systems in place for responding to complaints. People were happy with the service provided and how staff provided their support.

There was good leadership within the service, staff were positive in their desire to provide good quality care for people and ensured that effective quality monitoring processes were used to drive future improvement. There was a positive culture within the service which was demonstrated by the attitudes of staff.

We observed that people were offered support which encouraged independence and ensured that their individual needs were met. We observed staff supported people to maintain their independence. For example, people were supported by staff to put away the shopping and to set the table for lunch. One person said, 'I am good at setting the table.'

We observed the atmosphere within the home was calm and relaxed and people were at ease in the company of staff. Staff were polite and respectful in their approach to people and interacted appropriately with them.

People were involved in planning their care and made decisions about their support and how they spent their time. We found that appropriate standards of cleanliness and hygiene in the home were being maintained. People's medicines were recorded and administered safely. However, handwritten entries on the medication administration record (MAR) sheets were not countersigned by a second person. We found that staff were provided with regular updated training, supervision and appraisal. This meant that they had the appropriate skills and knowledge to provide appropriate care for the people they supported

There were quality assurance processes within the home and we found that there were appropriate systems in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others.

We observed that people were offered support at a level which encouraged independence and ensured that their individual needs were met. The atmosphere within the home was calm and relaxed and people were at ease in the company of staff supporting them. We noted that staff were polite and respectful in their approach to people and interacted appropriately with them, gaining their consent before providing support or participating in an activity.

We reviewed two care records and observed that people were involved in planning their care, making decisions about their support and how they spent their time. One person was attending a day centre at the time of our visit and another was involved in tasks to support their personal development. We were shown photographs of the different activities and entertainment that they participated in and the person told us how much they enjoyed everything they did within the home.

When we reviewed the care files for the two people living at the home, we observed that the care documentation had been signed by the individual or their representative to confirm their involvement and agreement with the provision of care.