Levina House

We found the following examples of good practice;

Staff had found creative ways to make people feel comfortable with the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). This has not only made people feel at ease but had also led to people using PPE themselves. Staff had taken time to explain the pandemic to people and had enabled them to talk about their feelings.

Where possible, social distancing was maintained and the staff team had found innovative ways of making sure people could spend time with each other in a safe way.

The management team had supported the wellbeing of staff. This had led to good staff retention over the pandemic meaning people were supported by a consistent staff team.

The management and staff team had followed guidance on infection control procedures to safely support people living at the service during the pandemic. There were effective systems in place for sharing information and updates with staff.

People and staff had regularly been tested for COVID-19 and where positive results had been returned the management had acted quickly to support people and mitigate risks. Staff had received training on infection prevention and control how to properly use PPE.

Guidance had been implemented to allow, where possible, people to continue with their daily lives and to see people who were important to them.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

.

People continued to receive safe care. There were enough staff to support them and they were recruited to ensure that they were safe to work with people. People were protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely. Lessons were learnt from when mistakes happened.

The care that people received continued to be effective. They 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. Staff received training and support to be able to care for people well. They ensured that people were supported to maintain good health and nutrition; including partnerships with other organisations when needed. The environment was adapted to meet people’s needs.

People continued to have positive relationships with the staff who were caring and treated people with respect and kindness. There were lots of opportunities for them to get involved in activities and pursue their interests. Staff knew them well and understood how to care for them in a personalised way. There were plans in place which detailed people’s likes and dislikes and these were regularly reviewed. People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the provider had a complaints procedure although to date they had not received any.

The registered manager was approachable and there were meetings in place which encouraged people to give their feedback. There were quality systems in place which were effective in continually developing the quality of the care that was provided to them.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

People who use the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. One person told us, “I have lots of opportunity to do what I want.”

We saw people’s needs were assessed and planned for. We spoke with four people who were using the service during our visit and received positive comments about the support provided. We were told, “I love it here.” and, “The staff support me well.”

People were protected from the risk of abuse and staff had guidance and training to ensure they responded appropriately to any incident which might require a referral to safeguarding vulnerable adults teams. People we spoke with felt safe with the staff working in the home.

Appropriate checks were carried out on staff prior to them commencing work in the service to ensure they were of the right character to work with vulnerable adults.

People were given the opportunity to give their views on how the service was run. People felt they were listened to if they raised any issues.

People were encouraged to make choices for themselves. For example people were involved in planning the menu and social events. One person told us, “I like to help out. I do hoovering and help in the kitchen.”

People’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We looked at the care plans of two people who were using the service. We found the plans were person centred and gave staff information about each person’s needs.

We asked one person if they felt safe in the service and they told us they did. We also spoke with their relative and they told us they felt the person was kept safe. The person knew who they could talk to should they have any concerns.

We found that staff were supported to receive appropriate professional development. Within all of the staff files viewed we saw that staff had been given regular supervision sessions with management. There was also evidence that staff were receiving ongoing training to ensure they did their job safely.

The people we spoke with said they felt comfortable discussing any concerns they may have with staff. They told us they felt their concerns would be listened to and action taken to address them.