Archived: Coppice Close

Coppice Close provides residential care and support for up to four people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there were three people living at the home.

The service has a registered manager. 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. A registered manager had been in post for five years. This person was responsible for some other of the provider’s services. The assistant manager was responsible for the day to day running of the service.

Relatives and staff told us people who lived at the home were safe. Staff had a good understanding of what constituted abuse and knew what actions to take if they had any concerns. Staff were proactive in identifying risks to people’s safety and how to minimise these.

There were enough staff to care for the people they supported. Checks were carried out prior to staff starting work to ensure their suitability to work with people who used the service. Staff received an induction into the organisation, and a programme of training to support them in meeting people’s needs effectively.

Care plans contained information for staff to help them provide personalised care. Care was reviewed regularly with the involvement of people and their relatives.

People received care from staff who knew them well. People and relatives told us staff were caring and had the right skills and experience to provide the care required. People were supported with dignity and respect and people were given a choice in relation to how they spent their time. Staff encouraged people to be independent.

People received medicines from trained staff and medicines were administered, stored and disposed of safely.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and how to support people with decision making, which included arranging further support when this was required.

People had enough to eat and drink during the day, were offered choices, and enjoyed the meals provided. People were assisted to manage their health needs, with referrals to other health professionals, and equipment was arranged where required.

People knew how to complain and could share their views and opinions about the service they received. Staff were confident they could raise any concerns or issues with the managers, who were approachable, and they would be listened to and acted upon.

There were processes to monitor the quality of the service provided. This was through regular communication with people and staff. There were other checks which ensured staff worked in line with policies and procedures. Checks of the environment were undertaken and staff knew the correct procedures to take in an emergency.

The management team strove to adapt and improve the service to meet people’s changing needs.

We spoke with two members of staff and the assistant manager. We observed how people were supported and how staff interacted with them to get a view of the care they experienced.

We considered all of the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes that we inspected. We used that information to answer five key questions. Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We observed the interactions between the people who lived in the home and staff. People looked at ease in their surroundings. Staff spoke with them in a calm and friendly manner. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people who lived at the home.

We saw there were systems in place to ensure people received their medicines safely and as prescribed.

Recruitment practice was safe and thorough. Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and people were protected.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) which applies to care homes and hospitals. No applications had been made. The manager understood how this legislation applied to people and protected their rights.

We found that equipment was serviced at regular intervals to ensure it was safe to use.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their support plans. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in support plans where required.

It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and knew them well. We saw that people's care plans and risk assessments were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure that their changing needs were planned for.

We saw people were involved in menu planning. People received the foods they liked and staff encouraged healthy eating where possible.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people.

People appeared settled and happy. We saw that people were supported to take part in a range of activities of their choice. This ensured people led fulfilling lives. People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them. People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

We saw people's care plans and risk assessments were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure their changing needs were planned for.

People regularly completed a range of activities in and outside the service. The home had its own transport which helped keep people who were unable to use public transport involved with their local community.

Records showed that staff responded quickly to changes in people's health. We saw people had access to a variety of health care providers to ensure their needs could be met.

Is the service well-led?

The manager was on leave at the time of our inspection. It was clear when talking with the assistant manager that the manager was experienced and caring and provided good leadership based on how best to meet the needs of people in an individualised way. The assistant manager had worked at the home for many years. They demonstrated a good knowledge of the running of the home and what people's support needs were.

There were systems in place so people who lived in the home could share their views about how the home was run. The assistant manager was able to give us examples of actions taken and changes that had been made as a result of listening to the people living in the home.

We observed staff offering people choices throughout the day. Staff understood the importance of obtaining people's consent to the support provided. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, best interests meetings were held to support them in making decisions.

We saw that people were referred to other healthcare professionals when a need was identified. There were processes in place for assessing and managing risks associated with people's care.

Staff told us they received timely and relevant training that supported them in developing their skills to meet the needs of the people who lived in the home. Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the management team.

Staff were encouraged to make suggestions about how they felt the service could be improved. We saw that some suggestions had been implemented. One staff member we spoke with told us, 'You are free to put your ideas down and have an input in what changes you would like to see.' There were systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of service provided.

We saw that staff were working closely with one person to promote and develop their independent living skills. Others were encouraged by staff to participate in tasks around the home to maintain their skills.

We saw care plans reflected people's individual needs. Staff spoke knowledgeably about the support people required as detailed in their care plans.

Staff spoken with showed a good awareness of what abuse was. They were also clear about their duty to be observant and recognise changes in people, both physical and emotionally.

On the day of our visit we saw there were enough staff on duty to provide one to one support to each person who lived there at some time during the course of the day.

The home had a complaints policy. One person told us they would go to the manager if they were unhappy or worried.