Cambuslodge UK Limited

Updated 26 October 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

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Cambuslodge is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or 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.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we held about the service, including notifications of serious incidents that the provider is required by law to tell us about. We asked the provider to complete a provider information return (PIR). This is a document which asks for certain information about the service, including what they think they are doing well and their plans to develop the service in future.

We spoke with a reviewing officer from the local authority to obtain their views on the service; these were positive.

The provider had told us that people using the service were going on holiday soon. We took this into account when planning and conducting this inspection. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service and made observations of their interactions with staff. We spoke with the director and four care workers. We looked at records of care, support and medicines management for two people. We looked at records of recruitment, supervision and appraisal for four care workers. We also reviewed a range of records such as health and safety, menu planning, staffing rotas and training and house meetings.

Updated 26 October 2019

About the service

Cambuslodge is a small care home providing personal care to five adults with learning disabilities in Fulham.

People’s experience of using this service

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent. The service advocated to make sure people had their choice of activities and the healthcare support they needed.

People told us they were happy living in the service and were treated with kindness and respect by staff. Comments included “I’m happy here” and “staff are very nice, incredible really.”

People were encouraged to have responsibilities in the running of the house and to develop their independence. People told us they did activities of their choice and were supported to pursue their interests. The home had a friendly dog who had lived there for many years. People using the service loved the dog and played a role in walking, feeding and looking after her.

Risks to people’s safety were managed in a way which promoted their independence. Care workers were recruited safely and there were enough staff available to support people safely in the house and to access their activities.

People were in charge in planning and reviewing their care and setting goals for their independence. People increased their independence which enhanced their involvement in the local community and relationships with family and friends. People were supported to communicate well and speak up about their views.

Care workers received enough training and supervision to develop their skills and meet people’s needs. Staff were proactive in addressing people’s health needs and promoting healthier lifestyles and balanced diets. 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

The manager and director were closely involved in the running of the service and promoted an open culture. There were regular meetings of the staff team and residents and strong links with other services in the area.

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of the thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.

The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 7 March 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a routine inspection in line with our re-inspection guidelines. No concerns had been raised about the service.

Follow up

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