You are here

Amber House Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 24 October 2019

About the service

Amber House is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 22 people with a learning disability, or autistic spectrum disorder.

Amber house was registered for the support of up to 22 people. 18 people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. However, The service didn’t always apply the full principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. Further work was needed to ensure people’s independence was promoted as much as possible, and that opportunities such as the use of information technology were developed.

The outcomes for people using the service did not always reflect the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support did not always focus on them having as many opportunities as possible to gain new skills and become more independent. Staffing levels were impacting on some aspects of this; there were not always sufficient staff to support people to be more independent or to take part in day to day activity of their choosing.

Following the inspection, the provider did increase staffing levels. They did not however have a dependency tool to calculate staffing levels. Without this the provider was unable to demonstrate there were enough staff on duty.

Care plans needed to include details of decisions people could still make for themselves to maximise choice and independence. Staff tried to support people to have maximum choice and control of their lives and support them in the least restrictive way possible. However, staffing levels impacted on this.

Governance systems were not sufficiently robust or regularly completed to identify issues.

People’s nutritional needs were met and monitored. People were referred to health and social care professionals as required.

People told us that staff were caring, and we observed positive interactions between people and staff. Staff received training relevant to their role.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (Published 11 September 2018).

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection not enough improvement had not been made and the provider was still in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the safe, effective, responsive and well-led sections of this full report. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Enforcement

We have identified breaches in relation to staffing, safe care and treatment, person-centred care, governance, and reporting procedures. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will also request an action plan. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was not always safe

Details are in our safe findings below

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was not always effective

Details are in our effective findings below

Caring

Good

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our caring findings below

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was not always responsive

Details are in our responsive findings below

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 24 October 2019

The service was not always well-led

Details are in our well-led findings below