Adlington House

Updated 30 April 2019

The inspection:

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

Inspection team:

Two adult social care inspectors carried out the site inspection on both days.

Service and service type:

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. Not everyone using this service receives a regulated activity; the Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

The service had a manager registered with the CQC. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit due to the service being small and we needed to inform people, we would like to visit their apartments to talk with them.

Inspection site visit activity started on 19 March 2019 and ended on 20 March 2019. We visited the office location on 19 March 2019 and 20 March 2019 to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records, policies and procedures.

What we did:

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection in August 2016. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse. We contacted the local authority safeguarding and commissioning teams to gather information about the service. We had requested the service complete a provider information return (PIR); this 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. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with six people who used the service and four relatives to ask about their experience of the care provided. We also spoke with the registered manager and three staff members, including a senior team leader and care workers. In addition, we spoke with a professional who worked with the service.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records, risk assessments and medication administration records (MARs). We also looked at three staff personnel files around staff recruitment, training and supervision records. In addition, we reviewed records relating to the management of the service, audits, and a variety of policies and procedures developed and implemented by the provider.

Updated 30 April 2019

About the service:

Adlington House provides care and support to people living in specialist 'extra care' housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought and is the occupant's own home. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. The purpose built three storey building, set in its own grounds, offers 52 self-contained retirement apartments. The building consists of two communal lounges, a communal garden, an activities room and a restaurant. The building also has staff facilities, including an on-site office and a staff room.

Not everyone living at Adlington House received a regulated activity. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of inspection 11 people living at Adlington House were receiving a regulated activity.

People’s experience of using this service:

We saw the service had received many compliments from people who used the service and their relatives. One compliment said, “We sincerely believe that the kindness and consideration shown to [person name] played a huge part in enabling her to hold onto her independence and self-respect, and to live out the last of her life in the safety and warmth of her own home.”

People were supported to understand how to keep safe and to raise concerns if abuse occurred. People continued to tell us they felt safe with their care and support.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. One person told us, “I enjoy life here, this place has changed my life.”

The service worked with people’s social workers to ensure their needs were met, and professionals spoke positively about the service. People's needs were comprehensively assessed and regularly reviewed. People and families were involved in reviews.

We observed positive interactions between staff and people. Staff had good relationships with people and knew them well. Staff were seen to be caring towards people, and respected people's wishes.

People were supported to express their views. People we spoke with told us they had choices and were involved in making day to day decisions.

All the people we spoke with could tell us how to make a complaint but did not feel they needed to. One person remarked, “The staff are gentle, kind and pleasant and respect me as a person. They are all like that, I couldn't single anyone out good or bad. I have no complaints”.

The provider and registered manager followed governance systems which provided effective oversight and monitoring of the service.

The service continued to meet the characteristics of Good in all areas; more information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

Good (report published 23 May 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good in all areas and Good overall.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.