Archived: Yellow House Care Home

Updated 1 July 2016

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.

The inspection took place on 31 May 2016 and was announced. 48 hours’ notice of this inspection was given, which meant the provider and staff knew we were coming. We did this to ensure that appropriate staff were available to talk with us, and that people using the service were made aware that we would wish to talk with them to obtain their views. This service has not been inspected before.

One inspector and an expert by experience in older people’s care undertook this inspection. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. We considered information which had been shared with us by the local authority and clinical commissioning group. The provider had also completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We observed care in the communal areas of the service. We spoke with people and staff, and observed how people were supported during their lunch. We spent time observing care and used the short observational framework for inspection (SOFI), which is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spent time looking at records, including four people’s care records, four staff files and other records relating to the management of the service, such accident/incident recording and safety documentation.

During our inspection, we spoke with six people living at the service, four care staff, the manager and the deputy manager.

Updated 1 July 2016

This inspection took place on the 31 May 2016. Yellow House Care Home is registered to accommodate up to 10 people who require support with their personal care. They specialise in supporting adults with a learning disability. The service is based in a residential area of Hove. This service has not been inspected before.

There was a manager in post, who had applied to become the registered manager. However, at the time of our inspection, they were not registered with the CQC. 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.

There were systems in place to evacuate people and deal with emergencies. However, the service had no formalised business continuity procedures to follow. This placed people at risk should an emergency take place.

Staff told us they felt supported and had informal development plans to enhance their skills and knowledge. However, we were informed by staff and the manager that regular formal supervision meetings had not regularly been taking place for care staff.

Statutory notifications had not been routinely submitted to CQC by the provider. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. Notifications in relation to these relevant events had not been sent to the CQC.

We have identified the issues above, as areas of practice that need improvement.

People were happy and relaxed with staff. They said they felt safe and there were sufficient staff to support them. One person told us, “I feel safe, because this is my home and I live here”. When staff were recruited, their employment history was checked and references obtained. Checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding adults and what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place.

Medicines were managed safely and in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately.

People were being supported to make decisions in their best interests. The manager had received training and staff were knowledgeable of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Staff had received essential training and there were opportunities for additional training specific to the needs of the service, including autism, behaviour that may challenge, and the care of people living with dementia.

People were encouraged and supported to eat and drink well. There was a varied daily choice of meals and people were able to give feedback and have choice in what they ate and drank. One person told us, “I have had three cups of tea this morning, they get me one whenever I ask”. People were advised on healthy eating and special dietary requirements were met. People’s weight was monitored, with their permission. Health care was accessible for people and appointments were made for regular check-ups as needed.

People chose how to spend their day and they took part in activities in the service and the community. People told us they enjoyed the activities, which included swimming, yoga, singing and games consoles. People were encouraged to stay in touch with their families and receive visitors.

People told us they felt well looked after and supported and stated that staff were friendly and helpful. We observed friendly and genuine relationships had developed between people and staff. One person told us, “I’m happy here”. Care plans described people’s needs and preferences and they were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

People knew how to make a complaint. They said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed. Accidents and incidents were recorded appropriately and steps taken to minimise the risk of similar events happening in the future. Risks associated with the environment and equipment had been identified and managed.

Staff were asked for their opinions on the service and whether they were happy in their work. They felt supported within their roles, where managers were always available to discuss suggestions and address problems or concerns. One member of staff said, “We can always ask for help and always approach [the manager]. We discuss any concerns as a team, we always discuss it together”.

The service regularly asked other stakeholders to fill in surveys about the quality of the service and people’s feedback was included in plans for future improvements. There were effective systems in place for monitoring the quality and safety of the service. Where improvements were needed, these were addressed and followed up to ensure continuous improvement.