Archived: Merrington Grange

Updated 2 June 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection completed by one inspector carried out on the 12 April 2018, with a further announced visit on the 13 April 2018. We spoke with some family members on 23 April 2018 by telephone.

The inspection was partly prompted by an incident which had a serious impact on a person using the service and that this indicated potential concerns about the management of risk in the service. While we did not look at the circumstances of the specific incident, which may be subject to criminal investigation, we did look at associated risks.

Before our inspection visit, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information we held about the service in the form of statutory notifications received from the service and any safeguarding or whistleblowing incidents, which may have occurred. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law.

We asked the local authority and Healthwatch for any information they had which would aid our inspection. We used this information as part of our planning. Local authorities together with other agencies may have responsibility for funding people who used the service and monitoring its quality. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion, which promotes the views and experiences of people who use health and social care services.

During the inspection we spoke with three people living there. However, we were not able to talk about the care and support they received in depth. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

In addition we spoke with three family members, the manager, deputy manager and four care staff members. We looked at the care and support plans for three people including assessments of risk and guidance for the use of medicines. We looked at records of quality checks completed by the manager and the provider. We further confirmed the recruitment details of two staff members.

Updated 2 June 2018

This unannounced inspection took place on 12 and 13 April 2018. At our previous inspection in February 2016 we had no concerns in the quality of care and had rated the service as good. At this inspection we found that the service was still good. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection

Merrington Grange 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. Merrington Grange is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to nine people who have learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection eight people were living there.

Merrington Grange has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

A manager was in post and was resent throughout this inspection. They had recently been appointed by the provider and had yet to register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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 continued to remain safe as staff knew how to recognise and respond to concerns of ill-treatment and abuse. There were enough staff to support people to meet their needs. Staff members followed safe infection prevention and control practices. The provider followed safe recruitment procedures when employing new staff members. The provider learnt from incidents and accidents and worked with people and families to minimise the risk of reoccurrence if things had gone wrong.

People were safely supported with their medicines by competent staff members. People received care and support from staff members who had received training and support to effectively assist them. New staff members received an introduction to their role and were equipped with the skills they needed to work with people.

People continued to receive care that was effective and personalised to their individual needs and preferences. 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 were able to access areas of their own home and garden.

People received support that continued to be caring and respectful. People were supported by a staff team that was compassionate, thoughtful and kind. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by those providing assistance. People were supported at times of upset and distress.

People, and when needed family or advocates, continued to be involved in developing their own care and support plans. When changes occurred in people’s personal and medical circumstances, these plans were reviewed to reflect these changes. The management team had procedures in place to address people’s care as they approached end of life. People’s individual preferences were known by staff members who supported them as they wished. People and their relatives were encouraged to raise any concerns or complaints. The provider had systems in place to address any issues raised with them.

Merrington Grange continued to be well-led by a management team that people and staff found approachable and supportive. People were involved in decisions about their care and support and their suggestions were valued by the provider. Staff members believed their opinions and ideas were listened to by the provider and, if appropriate, implemented. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of service they provided and where necessary made changes to drive improvements.