Archived: Cloverdale House

Updated 4 October 2017

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.

The inspection took place on 1 and 7 August 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by an inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the home. The provider had sent us an information return (PIR) in which they outlined how they ensured they were meeting people’s needs and their plans for the next 12 months. As part of the inspection, we reviewed the PIR. We contacted the local authority to obtain their views about the care provided. We considered the information which had been shared with us by the local authority and others, looked at safeguarding alerts which had been made and notifications which had been submitted. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

We met with all nine people who lived at the home and observed their care, including at lunchtime and with activities. We inspected the home, including the kitchen, garden area and some people's bedrooms. We spoke with five of the care workers, the registered manager and two area managers for the provider.

We 'pathway tracked' five of the people living at the home. This is when we looked at people's care documentation in depth, obtained their views on how they found living at the home and made observations of the support they were given. It is an important part of our inspection, as it allowed us to capture information about a sample of people receiving care.

During the inspection we reviewed records. These included six staff recruitment, training and supervision records, medicines records, risk assessments, accident and incident records, quality audits, questionnaire returns and policies and procedures.

Updated 4 October 2017

This inspection took place on 1 and 7 August 2017. The first day was unannounced. Cloverdale House is registered to provide care and accommodation to 11 people. There were nine people living there when we inspected. People cared for were all younger adults. Most people were living with autistic spectrum conditions. Some people had other care needs, including learning disability and epilepsy. Some people needed support with behaviours which may challenge.

Cloverdale House is situated on a quiet residential road in Hove. Accommodation is provided over several floors; there were communal rooms on the ground floor.

Cloverdale House was last inspected on 24 May 2016. At that inspection, they were rated as requiring improvement. The provider was also not meeting the requirements of Regulation 12 of the HSCA 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. By this inspection, the provider had taken action and had fully addressed the Regulation.

A registered manager had been appointed since the last inspection. 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 provider for Cloverdale House is Aitch Care Homes (London) Limited, who provide similar services across a range of areas in the south and east of England.

At the last inspection, people's medicines were not managed so that they received them properly and safely. The provider had addressed this. There were effective systems to ensure people received their medicines. Medicines were stored safely and full records kept. Staff understood their responsibilities for supporting people with taking their medicines.

People’s risk was assessed and where risk was identified, they had a care plan drawn up to reduce their risk. Staff followed care plans when supporting people. Staff followed procedures to protect people from risk in the general environment, including fire safety.

Staffing levels had improved and people told us the staff team was now stable. This meant people had improved opportunities to decide how they wanted to spend their days, as well as ensuring their safety. Newly appointed staff had been recruited appropriately to ensure they were safe to work with people.

Staff understood their responsibilities for safeguarding people from risk of abuse. Where people lacked mental capacity appropriate procedures were followed, in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Where people were subject to a Deprivation of Liberties (DoLS) safeguard, staff were aware of actions to take.

Staff showed a caring, respectful attitude to people. Staff encouraged people’s independence and helped them to make choices. People were supported in engaging with life in the home and the local area, as well as with their families. People were encouraged to choose what they wanted to eat and drink and were supported with healthy choices in eating and drinking.

People were involved in drawing up plans about their care. Staff followed these care plans. Staff supported the people who were living with behaviours which may challenge in an appropriate and supportive way. Where people had additional care needs, including medical needs, people had clear care plans and there was evidence of regular liaison with external healthcare professionals.

Staff were trained in meeting people’s needs. Staff said the registered manager had further developed ways of supporting them in their role, including by supervision.

People could raise concerns and complaints with managers. The provider’s quality audit systems ensured where matters were identified action was taken to ensure people’s safety and well-being.