The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Cregg Na Ba

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Chain Lane, Battle, East Sussex, TN33 0HG (01424) 777280

Provided and run by:
Affinity Trust

Important: This service was previously managed by a different provider - see old profile

All Inspections

2 October 2017

During a routine inspection

Cregg Na Ba provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have learning disabilities and some associated physical or/and sensory disabilities. There were five people using the service at the time of inspection, ranging from 50-85 years of age. Some people are wheelchair user’s and required support with all of their personal care.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good and met all the fundamental standards we inspect against.

People were safe. Staff had a clear understanding on how to safeguard people and protect their health and well-being. People had a range of individualised risk assessments to keep them safe and to help them maintain their independence. Where risks to people had been identified, risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. Staff were aware of people's needs and followed guidance to keep them safe. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to ensure peoples safety.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Although the registered manager was absent on the day of inspection, we were joined by a manager from another location under the same provider.

The Manager who was supporting the service on inspection and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and applied its principles in their work. Where people were thought to lack capacity to make certain decisions, assessments had been completed in line with the principles of MCA. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS); these provide legal safeguards for people who may be deprived of their liberty for their own safety.

Staff received a wide range of training to ensure they could support people safely and received support to carry out their roles effectively. People felt supported by competent staff that benefitted from regular meetings with their line manager and team meetings to help them meet the needs of the people they cared for. People's nutritional needs were met. People were given choices and were supported to have their meals when they needed them. People received care that was personalised to meet their needs. People were supported to maintain their health and were referred for specialist advice as required. There were good systems that ensured safe transitioning between services. Staff knew the people they cared for and what was important to them. Staff appreciated people's life histories and understood how these could influence the way people wanted to be cared for. Staff supported and encouraged people to engage with a variety of social activities of their choice in house and in the community. Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and respect and promoted people's independence and right to privacy.

The service looked for ways to continually improve the quality of the service. Feedback was sought from people and their relatives and used to improve the care. People knew how to make a complaint and complaints were managed in accordance with the provider's complaints policy. Leadership within the service was open, transparent and promoted strong staff values. This had resulted in a caring culture that put the people they supported at its centre.

People, their relatives and staff were complimentary about the management team and how the service was run. The registered manager informed us of all notifiable incidents. Staff spoke positively about the management support and leadership they received from the management team.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

9 and 10 July 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out on 9 and 10 July 2015 by one inspector. It was an unannounced inspection. Cregg Na Ba provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have learning disabilities and some associated physical or/and sensory disabilities. Some people are wheelchair user’s and require help with all of their personal care.

There were people five people living at the home at the time of our inspection. People living at the home were unable to express themselves verbally. We spent time observing the support provided to understand people’s experience of the service.

There was a manager in post who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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.

People’s welfare was safeguarded by sufficient numbers of staff who met people’s needs. The provider operated safe recruitment procedures which made sure staff employed were suitable to work with people. Staff had the appropriate skills and experience to meet people’s needs. They were able to put this into practice by using the knowledge they had gained from training and from detailed guidance in the personalised care plans. The registered manager supervised staff to support them to work to expected standards.

People were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines. The provider ensured that the premises were maintained safely and securely.

The environment was specifically adapted for people with restricted mobility. There was a sensory area in the lounge with plans to make the spare room into a sensory room and equipment available for people with sensory impairment. People’s rooms were personalised, homely and comfortable.

People’s care was personal and included their preferences and how they wanted their care to be delivered.

Staff communicated effectively with people despite their challenges, responded to their communication and offered people choices.

Staff sought people’s consent before they assisted them. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions the registered manager was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests. The system for monitoring Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) within the home protected people from harm and protected their rights.

People were supported to have a choice of food and drink. People were supported to manage their health care needs when necessary.

Staff treated people with kindness. People were supported with their preferences and had choices in their day-to-day lives. Staff demonstrated respect for people’s dignity and were careful to protect people’s privacy. Staff promoted people’s independence.

People and their relatives or representatives were asked for their views about how the home was run. The provider had a clear set of visions and values, which were put into practice by staff. The home had a clear, accountable management and staffing structure. There were regular audits to review the quality of care and safety of the premises.

20 August 2013

During a routine inspection

Five people were living in the home at the time of the inspection. Three people went out for the day supported by staff and we met them briefly before they left. One person was out with staff and returned for lunch.

We spoke with the manager and a member of staff but were unable to speak with people living at the home. We also spoke with relative of one person using the service who told us "the staff are very good".

We looked at all the care files relating to one person using the service. We found that care and support were planned and delivered in such a way as to ensure the welfare and safety of people using the service and to meet their individual needs. We saw that people were safe because risk assessments were undertaken and identified risks managed. Staff supported people to make choices.

We found that the manager and staff ensured personalised care by providing adequate food and drink and appropriate support as required.

We found that people were protected from risk because there were effective systems in place for the management of medication.

People benefitted from staff who were well trained and supported. There was a regular training programme in place and a system for staff supervision. A member of staff told us "the training is good".

During a check to make sure that the improvements required had been made

We reviewed the action plan that had been produced by the provider. We looked at the revised policy and procedures that had been put in place and we talked to the manager about the revised way of working that had been introduced.

24 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We observed that staff were caring and respectful in the care and treatment provided to people living at Cregg Na Ba. We were not able to communicate with people directly as they had difficulty communicating verbally or with people that they did not know. One person living in the home was excited by the visit and was happy and laughing, however, another person was anxious. Overall throughout our inspection the home had a calm and relaxed atmosphere.

We found that staff knew the people they looked after well. They were provided with the support needed because they understood people's preferences. This was not the case for one person who had recently transferred to the home. We found that their needs were not being met in the same way and there had been a delay in putting support plans in place.

One care worker told us that the home was "Brilliant... we care deeply about the people we support, they may not have had a good life but we want to make it better for them when they live here.'

We found that there were activities in place for people and the environment they lived in was clean, homely and safely maintained. There were audits in place that evaluated the standards of care, safety and well-being of people using the service.