You are here

Liberty House Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 17 January 2020

About the service

Liberty House is a residential home providing personal care to seven people, some with mental health needs and others with a learning disability. There were six people living in the home at the time of the inspection. The care home supports people in an adapted residential property.

The service did not consistently apply the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These when applied consistently ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible life outcomes for themselves that include control, choice and independence. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

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

Environmental risks had not been fully assessed to ensure people were safe. Medicines were stored and administered safely, improvements were needed to ensure ‘as required’ medicines were administered safely. There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service being provided. However, these were not fully effective and did not fully protect people in the home.

Some people were supported to have choice and control of their lives, however staff practices were restrictive and did not support people’s individual choices.

Recruitment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work with people at the service. Staffing levels were adequate to provide individual support and good overall levels of care. Risks that people presented had been assessed prior to them moving into the home.

The staff team felt involved in the running of the home and felt supported by the registered and deputy managers. Training for staff was linked to people’s support needs. Staff had supervision from the registered or deputy manager where they discussed how best to meet people’s needs. Staff responded to and supported people’s health and care needs.

People were provided with a varied diet which met their individual cultural needs. People were encouraged to develop self-help skills which enabled a progression toward expanding people’s individual skills and ultimately independent living.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and their consent was obtained prior to staff offering care. People were supported by a staff team who were kind and caring and treated them in a considerate and respectful manner. Staff promoted people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual needs informed by care and support plans, some areas such as oral care needed to be added in care plans. There was a complaints process in place which was managed effectively. Staff had considered people’s end of life choices and referred to this in care plans.

People’s views of the service were sought through meetings and surveys. The registered manager understood their roles and responsibilities as a registered person. They worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure people received care and support that was consistent with their assessed needs.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. The last inspection was July 2017 when the rating was Good.

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.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 17 January 2020

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 17 January 2020

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 17 January 2020

The service was not always caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 17 January 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 17 January 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our Well Led findings below.