You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 May 2018

The inspection took place on 16 and 17 April 2018 and was announced.

At the last inspection in August 2016 we rated the service ‘Requires Improvement.’ This is because we needed to be assured that improvements made following the February 2016 inspection were sustained. At this inspection we found the service had sustained these improvements and further developed the service.

Redburn House provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes with mental health needs. Until March 2018 Redburn House had been registered as a care home, but was now one of 11 supported living settings where staff provided personal care and support. Supported living settings allow people to live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. In addition, the service provides a domiciliary care service to people. Most people received minimal personal care comprising of prompting with washing, showering and continence. At the time of the inspection, 26 people were receiving personal care from the service including the prompting of personal care.

A registered manager was not in place. The provider had made the decision to become the registered manager for the service and submitted an application which was in the process of being assessed by the Commissions registration team. 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.

People said they felt safe using the service. Staff knew how to identify and report any concerns. Risks to people’s health and safety were well managed by the service. Following adverse events, action was taken to improve the safety of the service. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received a consistent level of care and support. Staff were recruited safely to ensure they were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. Staff received a good level of care and support to enable them to meet people’s individual needs.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed and people were supported to ensure they ate and drank appropriately. The service worked with a range of professionals to help meet people’s healthcare needs.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Care was delivered in the least restrictive way possible and people were involved in decisions relating to their care and support.

Staff were kind and caring and treated people well. People spoke positively about the staff that supported them. Staff had developed strong relationships with people and people were cared for by familiar faces. People were encouraged to develop and maintain relationships with other people who used the service. People’s views and opinions were sought and used to make improvements to the way care and support was provided.

People’s care needs were met. Care and support plans were detailed and demonstrated a thorough assessment of people’s needs. We found appropriate care was delivered in line with these plans. People’s care needs were subject to regular review.

People were encouraged to maintain links with the local community and undertake a range of activities.

Complaints were recorded, investigated and responded to in a timely way. People said they were happy with the way the service was provided.

People spoke positively about the way the service was managed. They knew the management team and said they were approachable. There was

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 May 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and plans of care put in place for staff to follow. Staff knew people well and how to keep them safe.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received consistent care and support. Staff were recruited safely.

Overall medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 May 2018

The service was effective.

People received effective care that met their individual needs and improved their outcomes.

Staff received a range of training and support relevant to their role as mental health support workers. Staff felt well supported by the service.

The service worked effectively with a range of health professionals to ensure people’s needs were met.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS).

Caring

Good

Updated 19 May 2018

The service was caring.

Staff treated people well and were caring. Staff knew people well and had developed good relationships with them.

The service was effective at promoting people’s independence.

People’s views and opinions were listened to and valued.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 May 2018

The service was responsive.

People’s care needs were assessed and good quality care and support provided in line with people’s preferences and needs. People’ support needs were subject to regular review.

People had access to a range of activities and social opportunities whilst using the service.

People knew how to complain. Complaints were properly recorded, investigated and outcomes used to improve the service.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 May 2018

The service was well led.

People and staff spoke positively about the way the service was managed. People said the management team were friendly and approachable.

We found a good culture within the service focused on improving people’s outcomes.

A range of audits and checks were undertaken by the management team. Findings were used to continuously improve the service.