You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 March 2019

The inspection took place on 16 January 2019. The inspection was unannounced.

Ravenlea is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Ravenlea accommodates up to seven people who have learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Some people had additional health concerns such as epilepsy and diabetes. There were six people living at the service when we inspected.

The care 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. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

This service was last inspected in September 2017 and we found two breaches of regulations and improvement was required. The breaches concerned not responding promptly to concerns about people’s safety and a failure to notify CQC of events which was legally required. This inspection found required improvement had been made and the previous concerns were addressed.

People's medicines were well managed and stored safely; there was clear guidance for staff on how to support people to take their medicines.

Risks to people were individually assessed and there was comprehensive guidance for staff. People were kept safe from avoidable harm and could raise any concerns with the registered manager.

There was enough suitably trained and safely recruited staff to meet people’s needs. Staff had the right induction, training and on-going support to do their job. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet and were given choice with their meals.

People’s needs and rights to equality had been assessed and care plans were kept up to date when needs changed. People were protected from any environmental risks in a clean and well-maintained home. Lessons were learnt from accidents and incidents.

Health and social care professionals were involved in people’s care and support and people accessed the healthcare they needed. Staff worked closely with other organisations to meet people’s individual needs.

People’s needs were met by the facilities provided at Ravenlea. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff were caring, the management team ensured there was a culture which promoted treating people with kindness, respect and compassion. Staff were attentive to people. The service had received positive feedback and people were involved in their care as much as possible. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity and people were encouraged to be as independent as possible. Visitors were made welcome.

Personalised care met people’s needs, care plans were person centred and up to date. Where known, people’s wishes about their end of life care were recorded. People were encouraged to take part in activities they enjoyed. There had not been any complaints but people could raise any concerns they had with the registered manager. The provider sought feedback from people and their relatives which was recorded and reviewed.

People were happy with the management of the service and staff understood the vision and values of the service promoted by the provider and staff. There was a positive, person centred and professional culture. The registered manager had good oversight of the quality and safety of the service, and risks were clearly understood and managed. This was supported by good record keeping, good communication and working in partnership with other health professionals. The management team promoted continuous learning by reviewing audits, feedback and incidents and making changes as a result.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 March 2019

The service was safe.

People received their medicines safely from staff who were trained to do so.

People were protected from the risk of abuse; any allegations of abuse were immediately reported and investigated.

Risks to people and the environment were assessed and staff acted to manage and reduce risk.

There were enough staff available to meet people�s needs. New staff were recruited safely.

People were protected by the prevention and control of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 March 2019

The service was effective.

People were provided with care based on an assessment of their needs.

People were cared for by staff who knew their needs well.

Staff encouraged people to eat and drink enough.

Staff met with their managers to discuss their work performance and each member of staff had attained the skills they required to carry out their role.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were understood by the provider and staff received training about this.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 March 2019

The service was caring.

Staff acted sensitively to protect people�s privacy and dignity.

Staff engaged well with people and spoke with them in a caring, dignified and compassionate way.

People were supported to be as independent as possible.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 March 2019

The service was responsive.

People�s care and support was planned in line with their individual care and support needs.

Staff knew people well and had a good understanding of individual�s needs and preferences. People were relaxed in the company of each other and staff.

There was a complaints system and people knew how to complain but said they had no complaints.

Well-led

Good

Updated 7 March 2019

The service was well led.

The provider and the management team had good systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.

Systems were in place to enable people, their relatives and health and social care professionals to provide feedback.

Policies and procedures were continually updated and accessible to staff.

The registered manager kept up to date with good practice and gained support and knowledge from attendance at conferences, forums and events in the local area.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and the provider.