You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 17 October 2017

During a routine inspection

This announced inspection took place on the 17 October 2017. This was our first inspection at this service.

Green Lane Farm is a detached residence used as two properties. The service supports up to five younger adults with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, mental health and sensory impairment to live as independently as they can. Most people accessing the services have complex needs associated with their diagnosis.

One area of the property is used for respite care and has four bedrooms. The other side of the property is used as a permanent residence. The property has nearly three acres of land, a stable block, kennels and hay store. In the local area there is access to a range of facilities including a pub, social centre, vegetable farm shop and an arts therapy centre.

At the time of our inspection one person was living permanently in the home and other people were regularly accessing the respite facilities.

A registered manager had been in post since the service registered with us on 9 December 2016. 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.’

Staff told us about potential signs of abuse and the many different types. They knew how to report any concerns they may have and were knowledgeable about how to report within the structure of their organisation or externally to other regulators or local authorities.

Potential risks were identified and regularly reviewed, with detailed information and guidance to support staff to carry out their role. Staff told us they felt supported and that they could approach the registered manager with any queries or concerns at any time.

The service had a robust recruitment process in place. Staff were supported through a period of induction where they were introduced to people living at the service, and familiarised with company policies and procedures. Mandatory training was completed during induction and further training identified through regular supervisions and appraisals. In addition, staff were supported by health professionals who provided specialist training and support to meet people’s changing needs.

People were supported to be involved in making daily decisions and staff used an array of different communication methods, such as picture cards and people’s own adaptations of Makaton sign language. Where people lacked capacity to make some decisions, appropriate health professionals and relatives or representatives were invited to best interest meetings.

Relatives felt that staff truly cared for their loved ones. They worked hard to provide person centred care by involving people and their relatives when planning all aspects of their care and support. Records were detailed in care plans and included peoples like and dislikes, preferences and guidance from health professionals. Any changes to people’s needs were communicated immediately to staff and documentation signed to acknowledge their awareness and understanding.

Staff spoke warmly about people living at the service and felt they had become more like part of a family. All the staff without exception told us they worked well as a team together working towards the same goal. This was to create a homely atmosphere where people could feel safe and relaxed to enjoy a fulfilling and meaningful life whilst living at the service.

Relatives and staff knew how to make a complaint if they needed to and staff told us they felt their confidentiality would be maintained should they need to use the whistle blowing procedure.

The management and leadership within the home had a clear structure and the manager was knowledgeable about people’s care and support needs. Staff told us they were proactive in their approach, in that th