We carried out a review of the data available to us about Telegraph House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Telegraph House, you can give feedback on this service.
Telegraph House provides personal care for people with a learning disability in their own home. There were seven people using the service at the time of our inspection. The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿ The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; people were encouraged to be a part of the local community; attending clubs, day centres, leisure centres, local shops, pubs and other local services. People were supported to make their own decisions and be as independent as possible.
¿ People were put at the centre of the service and the culture was person-centred. People appeared happy, relaxed and at ease in their home and with other people.
¿ Staff spoke to people with kindness and respect, there was a lot of laughter between people and staff.
¿ People were encouraged to take responsibility of their own health.
¿ People were fully included in planning their personalised care.
¿ There was flexibility in how staff were deployed. People could change activities or receive their contracted hours at other times.
¿ People were supported in a way which focused on what they could do and promoted independence.
¿ People were consulted before other people moved into shared homes.
¿ People were encouraged to make as many decisions for themselves as possible. When people were unable to make complex decisions, decisions were made in their best interests with full involvement of people who knew the person well.
¿ Staff were trained in safe medicines management and people were fully involved in making decisions about how they took their medicines.
¿ Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe.
¿ All staff continued to receive regular training in areas essential to the effective running of the service.
¿ There continued to be effective monitoring around learning when things went wrong.
¿ There was a complaints policy and procedure in place with an easy read version to help people understand how to raise any concerns.
¿ The registered provider supported staff by offering continuous training, supervision and feedback.
¿ The registered provider continued to have a clear vision of the quality of service which was shared by staff.
¿ Staff were very positive about the culture of the service and were committed to providing people with support in a caring and personalised way.
¿ The registered provider held weekly staff meetings which fully engaged staff who were responsible for planning the agenda.
¿ Out of hours checks to monitor the quality of care provided were conducted.
¿ People, relatives and other significant individuals were asked for feedback so the service could improve.
Rating at last inspection:
This service was rated, “Good” at the last inspection on 01 April 2016. We published this rating on 10 June 2016.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned comprehensive inspection to check the service remained Good. We found overall that the service continued to meet the characteristics of Good.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive. We will carry out another scheduled inspection to make sure the service continues to maintain a Good rating.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Telegraph House provides personal care for people with a learning disability in their own home. There were five people using the service at the time of our inspection.
The registered provider was leading the service. Registered providers are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Staff were kind and caring to people and treated them with dignity and respect at all times. People were supported to be as independent as they could be, with everyone involved in the running of the service.
The registered provider was leading the staff team and had oversight of the service. Staff felt supported by them and were motivated. The registered provider was always available and was approachable. They had a clear vision of the service which they shared with staff.
There were enough staff, who knew people well, to meet their needs at all times. The registered provider had considered people’s needs and staff skills when deciding which staff would support people. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and worked as a team to support people to achieve what they wanted.
Checks had been completed to make sure staff were honest, trustworthy and reliable. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) criminal records checks had been completed. The DBS helps employers make safer recruitment decisions and helps prevent unsuitable people from working with people who use care and support services.
Staff had completed the training they needed to provide safe and effective care and support to people. They were supported to provide good quality care. Most staff held recognised qualifications in care. The registered provider met regularly with staff to discuss their role and practice.
People’s care and support was planned and reviewed with them, to keep them safe and help them be independent. People’s personal goals were supported including travelling abroad. Possible risks to people had been identified and people were supported to stay as safe as possible, while remaining independent.
Plans were in place to keep people safe in an emergency. Staff knew the signs of abuse and were confident to raise any concerns they had with the registered provider. Systems were in place to manage complaints received.
People were supported to attend regular health checks when they chose. They were supported to take the medicines they needed to keep them safe and well. People were offered advice and guidance about a healthy diet. People who needed assistance were supported to prepare their own meals.
The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered provider understood their responsibilities in relation to DoLS. People were not restricted and went out when they wanted to.
The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) had been met. The registered provider knew when assessments of people’s capacity to make decisions were needed. Staff assumed people had capacity and respected the decisions they made. When people needed help to make a particular decision staff helped them. Decisions were made in people’s best interests with people who knew them well.
The registered provider worked alongside staff and checked that the quality of the service was to the required standard. Any shortfalls found were addressed quickly to prevent them from happening again. People and their relatives were asked about their experiences of the care.
Accurate records were kept about the day to day running of the service, care and the support people received. These provided staff with the information they needed to provide safe and consistent care to people.
Systems were in operation to regularly assess the quality of the service. People and their relatives were asked for their feedback about the quality of the service they received.
Staff knew how to support people to make decisions and acted upon their decisions. People were treated with dignity and respect.
People were involved in planning their care and support on an on-going basis. People's care and support changed as their needs changed or at their request.
People were protected because staff knew how to recognise and respond to potential risks to people's safety and welfare.
Staff were supported by the manager to provide a safe and appropriate service which met people's individual needs.
The provider had implemented a person centred process to assess and monitor the quality of the service and responded to people's comments about the service they received.