19 May 2017
During a routine inspection
Orion House is registered to provide care and support without nursing for up to five people. They specialise in supporting people with autism. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the service.
There was a registered manager who was also the registered provider. 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 benefitted from a team of staff who were skilled and understood the complex needs of each person. There was a varied activities programme which included various trips and outings into the local community and places of interest.
Care and support was well planned which enabled staff to ensure people received personalised care. People’s safety was considered in every aspect of their care and support. Risks were well documented and people were supported to have fulfilling lives with the least restrictions possible to keep them safe.
Medicines were safely managed. The provider operated safe recruitment processes to ensure only staff that were suitable to work with vulnerable people were employed. Systems were in place to ensure people’s personal monies were safely handled and records kept to show the audit trail of where monies had been spent. Staff knew who they should report any concerns about possible abuse to. They were confident their concerns, ideas and suggestions were listened to and acted upon.
People were supported by a staff team with a range of skills and qualifications. Training and support to staff was seen as crucial to proving the right service to people. Staff felt valued and supported by a registered manager who worked alongside them. There were sufficient staff available on each shift to ensure people’s needs and wishes were being met. People and their relatives were confident in staffs’ ability to provide effective and person centred care. One relative said “They are very proactive in their approach, they support people well.”
People’s privacy and dignity were fully respected. Staff supported people in a kind and compassionate way. We observed staff supporting people in a way which ensured their dignity and respect was being considered.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Where possible, consent was gained before providing care. Staff were skilled at understanding people’s non-verbal cues. Staff understood how to ensure they were acting in people’s best interests. Where people lacked capacity to make decisions, records showed best interest meetings and decisions were made with relevant people.
People were supported to eat a well-balanced diet and they had access to health professionals to make sure they kept as healthy as possible.
The environment was kept clean and safe. Systems were in place to audit the environment, records and care and support provided. People’s views were sought in a variety of ways to help improve the service and ensure their voice was taken into account when planning for the future with such things as activities and what they wanted to have included in their menu choices. People’s relatives, staff and visiting professionals believed the management team to be open and inclusive. One relative said “This is the best service we saw and the approach is so caring. They keep us constantly updated.”
There was a positive culture of striving to continually improve. The registered manager and provider had a proactive approach to seeking out best practice and advocating for the rights of individuals.