All inspections: 2 Kettlewell Way - Care Quality Commission

This inspection took place on the 12 June 2015. We gave 24 hours notice that we would be visiting to ensure people and staff would be available to speak with us.

Kettlewell Way provides care and accommodation for up to three people with a diagnosis of a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our visit there were two men living in the home.

There was a registered manager at the time of our inspection. 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.

2 Kettlewell Way provided a home environment where people were enabled to lead independent lives and make their own decisions for their everyday living. People appeared settled and happy and were supported to take part in a range of activities of their choice. People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.

There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs both inside the home and outside in the community. Staff had a good and detailed understanding of people’s needs and the level of support they required to keep them safe.

Staff understood their responsibility to report any concerns they had about people’s wellbeing in accordance with the provider’s safeguarding procedure.

Medicines were stored and managed safely. Staff received training and they were regularly assessed to ensure they were competent to give people their medicines.

Staff received an induction to the service so they had a good understanding of the individual needs of people before working alone. They also received training in all areas considered essential for meeting the needs of people in a care environment safely and effectively.

The provider and registered manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure people were looked after in a way that did not inappropriately restrict their freedom. The provider had made applications to the local authority in accordance with the DoLS.

People’s mental health needs were cared for as well as their physical care needs and they were supported to see a range of external healthcare professionals. Information was shared during handover so all staff were aware of changes in people’s health.

People’s care plans contained information about their personal preferences and focussed on individual needs. Staff kept very detailed daily diaries which provided information staff could use when assessing people’s care needs.

There was a strong and stable management team in place who took time to know and understand the needs of the people who lived at the home. There were systems in place so people who lived in the home could share their views about how the home was run.

We visited 2 Kettlewell Way on 19 April 2013. There were three people living in the home at the time of this visit. No one knew we would be visiting. At the time of our visit one person was at a work placement. Another person returned from a shopping trip and told us it was "very nice" living there. The third person had complex communication needs. We therefore spent time observing how staff supported people in their home. We also spoke with the manager and three care staff.

We observed staff delivering care and support in a relaxed and friendly manner and as set out in people's care plans. Care plans were detailed and reflected people's individual needs. People were referred to external health professionals when necessary and detailed records maintained of those visits.

We looked at how the service managed medication. We saw there were systems in place to ensure medicines were administered safely to people.

Staff received training and support to meet the needs of the people living in the home.

Records were well organised, clearly set out and stored securely.

We carried out this inspection to check on the improvements we asked the provider to make following our inspection in December 2011. We visited 2 Kettlewell Way on 22 May 2012. There were two people living in the home at the time of this visit. No one knew we would be visiting. One of the people living in the home had complex communication needs and was unable to express their views to us. We spoke to one member of staff and the registered manager. We observed how people were being cared for and looked at records for people living there.

The home was clean and well maintained. Each person had their own bedroom which was personalised to their individual tastes.

We saw that people were treated with privacy and dignity. They were supported to be as independent as possible, both inside and outside the home.

The care plans for people living at 2 Kettlewell Way were detailed and contained sufficient information for staff so they could support people in a way that they preferred. We saw that one person had a nutrition support plan which staff were implementing to ensure their nutritional needs were being met.

There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. Some staff were working excessive hours.

Staff had training and knew what to do to ensure that the people living at 2 Kettlewell Way were safeguarded from abuse and harm.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided, but there were inconsistencies in the recording of information.

When we visited the service on 20 December 2011 there were two people living in the home. We saw that each person had their own bedroom and shared a bathroom.

We saw one person moving around the home using the kitchen and the laundry and tidying up. They looked happy and relaxed. The support worker on duty told us that the other person was unwell that day. We saw that they got up when they wanted to and were helped to take a bath and dress ready to go out for the afternoon. They were offered a late breakfast. We saw that the communication between the worker and the person was effective although the person had no verbal skill. Both people who lived in the home were well groomed and dressed for going out to Christmas festivities in fashionable clothes.

Workers generally had the skills and knowledge to look after and support the people who used the service. The service was carrying staff vacancies and some workers were working excessive hours. We have asked the provider organisation to improve this.

We saw that care files contained a lot of information about people. They had an individual and up to date care and support plan that included leisure and educational opportunities. Records showed that they had access to general and specialist healthcare when they needed it.

Not all identified risks to the person posed by their condition were being assessed and effectively managed by the provider organisation. We have required that this is improved.

The provider has updated safeguarding procedures. It acts to protect people from the risk of abuse including by cooperating with and seeking advice from other professionals.

We asked one person if they liked living at the home and they said they did. We asked them if they liked the support workers and they said 'yes.'

Archived: 2 Kettlewell Way

All Inspections

12 June 2015

During a routine inspection

19 April 2013

During a routine inspection

21, 22 May 2012

During a routine inspection

20 December 2011

During a routine inspection