Aspect House

Updated 26 August 2016

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

This inspection took place on 3 August 2016. The inspection was unannounced and carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service, for example, information from previous inspection reports, and a notification the provider sent, to inform us of events which affected the service. This is information the provider is required by law to tell us about. We looked at information received from commissioners of the service who supported people at the service. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services which are paid for by the local authority. They had no further information to tell us that we were not already aware of.

As part of our inspection process we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

People living at the home were able to tell us from their own experiences, what it was like living at Aspect House. We spoke with five people and two social care professionals. Social care professional’s work with individuals and families to improve their quality of life and enhance their wellbeing. We also spoke with a senior support worker, a team leader, a support worker (In the report we refer to these as staff) and the registered manager. We spoke with two relatives and the provider by telephone.

We reviewed three people's care records to see how their care and support was planned and delivered. We checked three staff files to see whether staff had been recruited safely and were trained to deliver the care and support people required. We looked at other records related to people's care and how the service operated, including the service's quality assurance checks.

Updated 26 August 2016

The inspection took place on 3 August 2016. The inspection was unannounced.

Aspect House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 13 people with mental health care needs. There were 11 people living at the home when we visited. The aim of the service is to support people whose goal is to live independently in the community.

The service had a registered manager. This is a requirement of the provider’s registration. 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.

All the people we spoke with told us they felt supported and safe living at Aspect House and this view was shared by relatives. The atmosphere in the home was relaxed and friendly. Staff were able to talk confidently about how they safeguarded people from abuse. The provider’s recruitment procedures reduced the risk of staff who worked at the home being unsuitable to work with people who lived there.

The registered manager and staff knew the people at the home well and were committed to providing a service that met people’s individual needs. Care plans contained relevant information for staff to help them provide the individual support people required in the way people preferred.

People were involved in making decisions about how they spent their days and were supported to take part in a wide range of activities at home and in the local community. People went on holidays of their choice. Staff supported people to be involved in daily tasks which helped increase and maintain people’s independence.

There were sufficient numbers of staff at Aspect House who had the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff were available to support people when needed, inside and outside the home.

Risk management plans informed staff how identified risks should be managed to keep people safe. People and their family members were involved in planning, and reviewing how they were cared for and supported.

The manager and staff mostly supported people in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff gained people’s consent before they provided care and support. Care workers respected people’s choices and decisions. However, where people did not have capacity to make some decisions information was not always clearly recorded.

People who lived at the home were supported to maintain links with family and friends. People and relatives thought staff were responsive to people’s needs and had the right skills and knowledge to provide care and support. Staff had completed the training the provider considered necessary to effectively meet people’s needs.

Staff supported people to attend health care appointments and to maintain their health and wellbeing. People had enough to eat and drink. People were supported to make food choices and offered alternatives if they did not like the food on offer. Staff followed guidelines to ensure people’s meals were prepared and served to manage any nutritional risks.

The provider had processes in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and drive continuous improvement. These were mostly followed, however medicines were not managed in line with the provider’s medication policy.

Staff were motivated and provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They treated people with kindness and compassion and made positive comments to people that gave them a sense of self-worth. Staff respected people’s privacy and worked with people to ensure their dignity was maintained.

Staff, people, relatives and social care professionals felt the registered manager was approachable. The provider and registered manager encouraged people, relatives and staff to share their views about the home. The provider acted on feedback to make improvements to the service provided.

People and relative’s told us they knew how to make a compliant if they needed to. Complaints were managed in line with the provider’s procedure. Everyone we talked with spoke very positively about the quality and effectiveness of the service provided, the staff and registered manager.