You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Outstanding

Updated 30 June 2017

This inspection was unannounced and took place on the 11 and 12 May 2017. Sansa House is a residential home which provides accommodation and personal care for up to five people who are supported with complex needs, including learning disabilities and autism. At the time of our inspection four people were living at Sansa House and one was visiting relatives.

The home is a detached house within a residential area close to Basingstoke town centre. Each person has their individual living space within the home, including en-suite bathrooms, with a communal lounge area and kitchen. People’s rooms had been decorated and furnished to meet their individual needs.

The primary aim at Sansa House is to support people to increase their independence and maximise their potential. Staff promoted people’s independence and provided emotional and psychological support for people to take part in activities outside and to plan and complete tasks around their home.

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. Since our last inspection the registered manager had also become the registered manager at another service within the provider’s care group. A deputy manager and a positive support coordinator managed the home in their absence, supported by two team leaders.

People felt safe living at Sansa House and trusted the staff who really cared for them. People were protected from the risks of potential abuse by staff who knew what actions to take if they felt people were at risk.

Risk assessments were created to protect people from harm whilst promoting their independence. Staff supported people in their everyday lives in accordance with their risk management plans, which minimised the risk of harm to them and kept them safe.

There were plans to protect people in the event of an emergency and the provider’s business plans ensured continuity of care to reduce the disruption to people and staff.

Accidents and incidents were recorded, reported and analysed by the registered manager to identify any themes or trends. The registered manager ensured all incidents were reflected upon during shift handovers and staff meetings to ensure necessary learning was shared as soon as possible.

Staff underwent robust pre-selection checks to assure the provider they were suitable to support people with autism or a learning disability. Daily staffing needs were analysed by the registered manager. This ensured there were always sufficient numbers of staff with the necessary experience and skills to support people safely.

People’s medicines were administered safely by staff who had completed safe management of medicines training and had their competency to do so assessed.

Staff had completed an effective induction course based on nationally recognised standards and spent time working with experienced staff. This ensured staff had the appropriate knowledge and skills to support people effectively.

The registered manager had innovative and creative ways of training and developing their staff that made sure they put their learning into practice to deliver good care to meet people’s individual needs. Staff received effective supervision, appraisal, and support to carry out their roles and responsibilities.

People were supported by staff who understood and effectively applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff confidently applied the MCA to make sure that people were involved in decisions about their care so that their human and legal rights were protected.

There was a strong emphasis on the importance of eating and drinking well. Staff devised methods to encourage t

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 30 June 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from the risks of potential abuse by staff who knew what actions to take if they felt people were at risk.

Staff protected people from harm by identifying risks associated with their support and managing these effectively.

The provider completed robust pre-employment checks of prospective staff to assure their suitability to support people with a learning disability or autism. Sufficient staff were deployed at all times to meet people’s needs safely.

People’s medicines were administered safely by staff who had completed the provider’s required training to do so.

Effective

Good

Updated 30 June 2017

The service was effective.

The registered manager effectively developed staff, providing opportunities to put their learning into practice, to deliver care that met people’s individual needs.

Staff confidently made use of the MCA to make sure that people were involved in decisions about their care so that their human and legal rights were protected.

There was a strong emphasis on the importance of eating and drinking well and staff devised effective methods to encourage those who were reluctant or had difficulty in eating and drinking.

The registered manager had developed effective links with health and social care services. Where people had complex and continued health needs, staff consistently sought to improve their care, treatment and support by identifying and implementing best practice.

Caring

Outstanding

Updated 30 June 2017

The service was exceptionally caring.

People consistently valued their relationships with the staff team and felt that they often went ‘the extra mile’ for them.

Staff were highly motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and compassionate and were determined and creative in overcoming any obstacles to achieving this. Staff were exceptionally creative at promoting people’s independence.

The service had a strong, visible person centred culture and was exceptional at helping people to express their views so they understood things from their points of view.

Staff were exceptional in enabling people to remain independent and had an in-depth appreciation of people’s individual needs around privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 30 June 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care that was tailored to meet their individual needs. Staff responded effectively to meet people’s changing health needs.

Staff promoted people’s confidence and independence to empower them to live their lives as they wanted.

Complaints were managed in accordance with the provider’s policy.

Well-led

Outstanding

Updated 30 June 2017

The service was exceptionally well led.

The registered manager and management team had developed a positive culture within the home, which was person centred and empowering. People, relatives and staff consistently described the registered manager as outstanding and inspirational.

People received a high standard of care because the management team led by example and set high expectations of staff about the quality of care people should receive.

The registered manager consistently recognised, encouraged and implemented innovative ideas and strategies to drive a good quality service

The service worked in partnership with other organisations to make sure they were following current best practice and providing a high quality service.