• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Jubilee House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

18 Hound Road, West Bridgford, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG2 6AH (0115) 981 7938

Provided and run by:
Mr John Albert Pownall

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

21 October 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 21 October 2014. Jubilee House provides accommodation and personal care for up to six people with a learning disability. On the day of our inspection six people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People told us they felt safe living at the care home. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. People received their medication when they needed it and medication was safely stored.

People were supported by a sufficient number of staff and effective recruitment and selection procedures were operated to ensure staff were safe to work with vulnerable adults.

People received support from health care professionals when needed and staff had the knowledge and skills to care for people safely.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. The DoLS is part of the MCA, which is in place to protect people who lack capacity to make certain decisions because of illness or disability. DoLS protects the rights of such people by ensuring that if there are restrictions on their freedom these are assessed by professionals who are trained to decide if the restriction is needed. We found this legislation was being used correctly to protect people who were not able to make their own decisions about the care they received. We also found staff were aware of the principles within the MCA and had not deprived people of liberty without applying for the required authorisation.

People had access to sufficient quantities of food and drink. The people we spoke with told us they enjoyed the food and were involved in selecting dishes to go on the menu.

People were treated with dignity and respect by staff. People who used the service told us they felt staff were always kind and respectful to them. People were able to be involved in the planning and reviewing of their care.

People gave their opinions on how the service was run and there were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. These resulted in improvements to the service where required.

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

We inspected Jubilee House on 8 May 2013 and found areas of non compliance with this regulation and issued a compliance action. The provider sent an action plan detailing the actions they would take to become compliant. To carry out this review we requested evidence of compliance from the provider. Based on the evidence we have received we have now judged Jubilee House to be compliant.

8 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with one person who was using the service and two relatives of people using the service. We were told that people were treated with dignity and respect. One relative told us, 'The staff seem nice and my relative is happy living at the home.' Another person said, 'The staff are always nice and always involve my relative. They give my relative choices and people are treated as individuals.'

Each person using the service had a healthcare needs file. These showed that people regularly attended appointments with various healthcare professionals, for example the GP and chiropodist. Where people required specialist support this had been arranged and any advice had been followed.

We spoke with one person who was using the service and two relatives of people using the service. We were told that people felt safe living at the service.

Surveys had been sent out to relatives of people using the service and healthcare professionals who were involved with the service. The response to these surveys was positive and indicated satisfaction with the service.