Archived: Sarsen House

Updated 30 May 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an Expert-by-Experience. An Expert-by-Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who used this type of care service.

Service and service type:

Sarsen House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provide, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This was an announced inspection which meant the provider had short notice that we would be visiting. This was because people living at the home could become anxious when not prepared for visitors.

What we did:

Before the inspection we reviewed the information, we held about the service and the service provider. The registered manager completed a provider information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at notifications we had received for this service. Notifications are information about important event the service is required to send us by law.

We observed the interactions and behaviours of all five people who lived at Sarsen House. We looked at three people’s care records. We also reviewed staff personnel documents, training and supervision records and a range of records about how the service is run. We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager the area care manager and five members of the care team. Following the inspection, we received feedback from two professionals who visit the service.

Updated 30 May 2019

About the service: Sarsen House is a residential home for adults with learning disabilities. It provides accommodation for up to six people. There were five people living there at the time of our inspection. Sarsen House is arranged over two floors with bedrooms upstairs and downstairs, shared bathrooms and a communal kitchen, lounge and dining area. The home had their own minibus for people to access the local community.

People’s experience of using this service: The service was rated as requires improvement at the last inspection in December 2017. Protocols for ‘as required’ medicines were not detailed or person-centred and information on where to specifically apply creams was missing. Medicines audits identified these areas but did not detail the actions taken to rectify the errors. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had not been consistently followed. At this inspection we found the necessary improvements had been made.

People were protected from the risk of abuse by staff who had been trained and knew how to report any concerns they had.

People had a variety of risk assessments which identified areas of risk and gave guidance to staff to minimise those risks.

People’s medicines were managed and stored correctly.

People were supported by staff who had regular one-to-one supervision from their manager and up-to-date training.

People’s needs were assessed by a multi-disciplinary team of professionals to ensure the home could meet their complex needs. Care plans were updated and reviewed at regular intervals or when people’s needs changed.

The staff were caring and Sarsen House had a family home atmosphere. Staff told us they enjoyed working there and found it rewarding to make a positive difference to the people they supported.

The management team had robust processes in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided which meant the service was well run.

Rating at last inspection: Requires Improvement, published January 2018.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: We will monitor all intelligence received about the service to inform when the next inspection should take place.