Archived: Heather Lodge

Updated 7 June 2018

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 comprehensive inspection took place on 19 April 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the previous inspection report and notifications about important events that had taken place in the service which the provider is required to tell us by law. We used this information to help us plan our inspection.

During the inspection, we observed the interaction between people and staff in the communal areas. We looked at three people's support plans and the recruitment records of two staff employed at the service. We viewed a range of policies, medicines management, complaints and compliments, meetings minutes, health and safety assessments, accidents and incidents logs. We looked at what actions the provider had taken to improve the quality of the service. We spoke with the deputy manager as the registered manager was on annual leave at the time of the inspection.

People used a range of communication styles and some people did not engage verbally about their experiences of the service. We spoke with two relatives of people, to gain their views and experience of the service provided.

After the inspection we also spoke to the registered manager and three staff by telephone.

We received feedback from three health and social care professionals about the service.

At the inspection we asked the provider to send us the staff training matrix and information about the registered manager’s quality assurance process. This information was received by us in a timely manner.

Updated 7 June 2018

The inspection took place on 19 April 2018 and was announced.

Heather Lodge is a residential care home for up to three adults with a learning disability. There were three people living at the service at the time of inspection. The accommodation was in one building, arranged over two floors. One bedroom and an adapted shower room were on the ground floor and two bedrooms were on the first floor. There was a communal lounge, a kitchen/dining room and a garden.

Heather lodge is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and 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.

At the last inspection, on the 08 March 2016 the service had an overall rating of ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

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

A registered manager continued to be employed at the service. 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 registered manager was also the provider.

There continued to be systems in place to keep people safe and to protect people from potential abuse. Staff had undertaken training in safeguarding and understood how to identify and report concerns. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines on time and when they needed them. The registered manager continued to assess and minimise risks. People understood these risks and how they were managed.

There was sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Staff training had been consistently updated and staff had the skills and knowledge they needed to support people with learning disabilities. Staff had regular supervision meetings and annual appraisals. New staff had been recruited safely and pre-employment checks were carried out.

People’s needs were continually assessed and support plans remained up to date and accurately reflected people’s needs. People were continually involved in decisions about their support. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible. Peoples support was individualised to them and met their needs. People made decisions about the activities they undertook. Staff were aware of peoples decisions and respected their choices.

People continued to be supported to maintain their health and wellbeing by eating a balanced diet. People were supported to maintain their health and had access to healthcare services. When people accessed other services such as going in to hospital they were supported by the service staff and there was continuity of care.

People were treated with respect, kindness and compassion. Staff took the time to listen to people and engage with them in a meaningful way. Staff knew people well and understood how people communicated. People were supported to communicate and build relationships with people in the community. People were well known in the community and were supported to maintain relationships with those who were important to them.

People were supported to express their views and had regular access to an advocate. People were supported to remain as independent as possible undertake activities of daily living. People’s privacy was respected and they were supported to lead dignified lives.

Staff recognised when people were upset or distressed and responded to this. There was a complaints system in place if people or their relatives wished to complain. There were systems in place to seek feedback from people, relatives in order to improve the service. Relatives told us that they felt well informed and that communication was positive and proactive. People were supported to discuss their wishes and preferences for the end of their lives.

The environment had been adapted to meet people’s individual needs and was personalised to reflect the people that lived there. The service was clean and well maintained. Staff were aware of infection control and the appropriate actions had been taken to protect people.

Staff, relatives and community health and social care professionals told us the service was well-led. The registered manager had a clear vision and values for the service which staff understood the services values and acted in accordance with. Staff and the registered manager understood their roles and responsibilities. The registered manager regularly audited the service to identify where improvements were needed.

When things went wrong lessons were learnt and improvements were made. Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns and incidents were recorded, investigated and acted upon. Lessons learnt were shared and trends were analysed.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies to develop and share best practice.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.