You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 9 January 2018

This inspection was carried out on the 12 and 14 December 2017. Shaldon House provides accommodation and personal care for 10 people. There were nine people living in the home at the time of the inspection. People who live at the Shaldon House have a learning disability. This was an unannounced inspection, which meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

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.

There had been a recent change in management. The registered manager had not worked in the home since 3 August 2017. A new manager had been appointed and had started at the end of September 2017. They were in the process of submitting an application to register. 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.

The changes of management have had an impact on the way the service was operating. This was because the previous registered manager had not completed what was expected of them in respect of completing staff supervisions, monitoring staff training and ensuring risk assessments were up to date. The new manager and the provider had devised a robust action plan. The newly appointed manager was committed to implementing the action plan to address these shortfalls to ensure ongoing compliance.

There was sufficient numbers of staff supporting the people living at the service. Systems to support staff such as one to one meetings were not happening at regular intervals and, there were no annual appraisals of staff’s performance. Training had lapsed throughout the year for staff and some staff had not completed the care certificate when they had first started working in Shaldon House.

People had access to healthcare professionals when they became unwell or required specialist equipment. Feedback from health and social care professionals was positive in respect of the staff’s approach to people and the delivery of care. People were supported with meaningful activities in their home and the community. People were supported to maintain contact with friends and family.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because there were clear procedures in place to recognise and respond to abuse and staff had been trained in how to follow the procedures. Systems were in place to ensure people were safe including risk management, checks on the equipment, fire systems and safe recruitment processes.

People had a care plan that described how they wanted to be supported in an individualised way. The newly appointed manager was planning to introduce a new planning tool in the new year. The manager had reviewed risk assessments as a matter of priority.

People were treated in a dignified, caring manner, which demonstrated that their rights were protected. Where people lacked the capacity to make choices and decisions, staff ensured people’s rights were protected by involving relatives or other professionals in the decision making process. The provider had submitted applications to the appropriate authorities to ensure people were not deprived of their liberty without authorisation.

People’s views were sought through house meetings and annual surveys. It was evident that people saw Shaldon House as being their home.

There were systems for checking the quality of the care and service. Shortfalls in the way the service was run had been picked up by recent audits. People and the staff spoke positively about the newly appointed manager and the changes that were being implemented.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 9 January 2018

The service was safe.

There were sufficient staff to support people.

The service provided a safe environment for people and risks to their health and safety were well managed by the staff. People received their medicine safely.

People could be assured where an allegation of abuse was raised the staff would do the right thing. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults enabling them to respond and report any allegations of abuse. Staff felt confident that any concerns raised by themselves or the people would be responded to appropriately.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 9 January 2018

Some improvements were required to ensure the service was effective. The manager had an action plan to address these areas to ensure staff received training, supervisions and an annual appraisal.

Staff were knowledgeable about the legislation to protect people in relation to making decisions and safeguards in respect of deprivation of liberty.

Other health and social care professionals were involved in the care of people and their advice was acted upon. People’s health care needs were being met.

People had access to a healthy and varied diet, which provided them with choice.

Caring

Good

Updated 9 January 2018

The service was caring.

People received a service that was caring and recognised them as individuals. Positive interactions between people and staff were observed. People were relaxed around staff.

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s daily routines and personal preferences. People were encouraged to keep in contact with family and friends.

Responsive

Good

Updated 9 January 2018

The service was responsive.

People received care that was responsive to their needs. Care plans described how people wanted to be supported.

People were supported to take part in regular activities in the home and the community.

People could be confident that if they had any concerns these would be responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 9 January 2018

Some improvements were needed to ensure the home ran smoothly. This was because there had been a period where there was no registered manager. This had impacted on the monitoring of the service ensuring that the service. The new manager knew what they had to do to improve the service.

Staff felt supported by the new manager and worked well as a team. Staff were clear on their roles and the aims and objectives of the service and supported people in an individualised way.

The quality of the service was reviewed by the provider/registered manager and staff.