We carried out a review of the data available to us about 3 to 5 Kennet Way on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about 3 to 5 Kennet Way, you can give feedback on this service.
3 to 5 Kennet Way is a residential care home. The service provides personal care and support for three people who have learning disabilities and associated conditions, such as autistic spectrum disorders.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service:
The provider did not always act promptly to implement the recommendations of external professionals in relation to fire safety. After feedback from the inspection, action was quickly taken to address issues identified.
There was a manager in place, who told us they intended to submit an application to CQC to register as manager of the service. The manager understood the requirements of their role and promoted a positive atmosphere at the service.
There were enough staff in place. The provider was in the process of recruiting more permanent staff to reduce the reliance on agency staff. All staff had enough training and supervision in place.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The provider had processes in place to gain appropriate consent to care. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were supported to live active lives, accessing activities in line with their interests and being supported to build their everyday living skills. Relatives told us they were happy with the care their family members received.
People were supported appropriately around their behaviour, anxiety and communication. There were systems in place to gain people’s feedback, listen to their concerns and protect them from the risk of suffering abuse or avoidable harm.
People’s needs in relation to their health and nutrition were met. People’s care reflected their individual needs. This included their preferred daily routines and preferences. They were supported to remain active and take part in a variety of activities.
Staff understood people’s needs and were motivated in their role. They treated people with dignity, respect and were patient when they offered support.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection:
The last rating for this service was good (published 29 July 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
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.
3 - 5 Kennet Way are two homes which provide residential care for up to three adults with mild to severe learning disabilities. Care is provided to those living with complex emotional and behavioural needs including Autism. Some people living at the service also had additional health conditions such as diabetes, epilepsy and brain injuries. 3 – 5 Kennet Way (to be referred to as the ‘the home’ throughout the report) comprises of two bungalows each with their own secure garden is situated in a residential setting in a village on the outskirts of Basingstoke. The homes gardens adjoin and both homes are accessible via a keypad coded garden gate. At the time of the inspection three people were using the service.
Care was provided by support workers who will be referred to as staff throughout the duration of this report.
3 - 5 Kennet Way has a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
Relatives of people using the service told us they felt their family members were kept safe. Staff understood and followed the provider’s guidance to enable them to recognise and address any safeguarding concerns about people.
People’s safety was promoted because risks that may cause them harm had been identified and guidance provided to manage risks appropriately. People were assisted by staff who encouraged them to remain independent. Appropriate risk assessments were in place to keep people safe.
Recruitment procedures were completed to ensure people were protected from the employment of unsuitable staff. New staff induction training was followed by a period of time working with experienced colleagues to ensure they had the skills and confidence required to support people safely. There were sufficient staff employed to ensure that people’s individual needs were met.
People were supported by staff who had the most up to date training available to enable them to proactively meet people’s individual needs.
Contingency plans were in place to ensure the safe delivery of people’s care in the event of adverse situations such as large scale staff sickness or accommodation loss due to fire or flood.
People were protected from the unsafe administration of medicines. Staff responsible for administering medicines had received training to ensure people’s medicines were administered, stored and disposed of correctly. Staff skills in medicines management were regularly reviewed by the registered manager to ensure they remained competent to administer people’s medicines safely.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were encouraged and supported to eat and drink sufficiently in order to meet their needs and were able to make choices about what they eat and drank. Staff supported people to promptly see a range of healthcare professionals in order to maintain good health.
Staff sought people’s consent before delivering their care and support. Documentation showed people’s decisions to receive care had been appropriately assessed, respected and documented.
People were supported to eat and drink a balanced diet. People were involved in developing the home’s menus and were able to choose their meal preferences. We saw that people enjoyed what was provided. People were supported to participate in meal times with the guidance provided by health care professionals being followed. Records showed people’s food and drink preferences were documented in their care plans and were understood by staff.
People’s health needs were met as the staff and the registered manager had detailed knowledge of the people they were supporting. Staff promptly engaged with healthcare agencies and professionals when required. This was to ensure people’s identified health care needs were met and to maintain people’s safety and welfare.
People were supported to participate in activities to enable them to live meaningful lives and prevent them experiencing social isolation. Family relationships were supported and a range of activities sought to enrich people’s daily lives. The registered manager and staff were motivated to ensure that people were provided with the opportunity to experience holidays and participate in a range of external activities.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The registered manager showed a comprehensive understanding of what constituted a deprivation of person’s liberty. Appropriate authorisations had been granted by the relevant supervisory body to ensure people were not being unlawfully restricted.
Staff had taken time to develop close relationships with the people they were assisting. Staff understood people’s communication needs and used non-verbal communication methods where required to interact with people. These were practically demonstrated by the registered manager and staff.
People received personalised and respectful care from staff who understood their care needs. People had care and support which was delivered by staff using the guidance provided in individualised care plans. Care plans contained detailed information to assist staff to provide care in a manner that respected each person’s individual requirements. People were encouraged and supported by staff to make choices about their care including how they spent their day within the home or in the community.
Relatives knew how to complain and told us they would do so if required. Procedures were in place for the registered manager to monitor, investigate and respond to complaints in an effective way although none had been received since the last inspection. Relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback on the quality of the service during regular meetings with staff and the registered manager. Information was made available in alternative formats to allow people receiving the service to provide their feedback or complaints, thereby enabling them to feel valued.
The registered manager and staff promoted a culture which focused on providing individuals with the opportunities to live their lives as members of the community promoting their independence. People were assisted by staff who encouraged them to raise concerns with them and the registered manager. The provider routinely and regularly monitored the quality of the service being provided.
The provider’s values of care to deliver positive, empowering and highly individualised care were communicated and understood by staff. We saw these standards were evidenced in the way that care was delivered to people.
The registered manager provided strong positive leadership and fulfilled the legal requirements associated with their role. The registered manager had informed the CQC of notifiable incidents which occurred at the service allowing the CQC to monitor that appropriate action was taken to keep people safe. Quality assurance processes were in place to ensure that people, staff and relatives could provide feedback on the quality of the service provided.
Relatives told us and we saw that the home had a confident registered manager and staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager.