Background to this inspection
Updated
27 April 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 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.
This was a comprehensive inspection which was carried out on 13 March 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that they would be in and to give the provider time to prepare people for our visit.
This was a routine inspection as we had rated this service ‘good’ 24 months ago. Since our last inspection we were aware of two potential safeguarding incidents; one concerned an assault on a person using the service by their housemate and one was regarding a serious medicines error. In both cases the provider told us how they had responded to the incident and the measures they were taking to prevent a recurrence.
The inspection was carried out by a single adult social care inspector. People using the service were not able to talk to us due to their learning disabilities, so we used other ways to understand their experiences such as observations of care. We attempted contact with two relatives and spoke with one. We also spoke with four health and social care professionals involved in planning and monitoring their care.
We looked at records of care, support and medicines records for both people using the service, and records of management of the service. This included staffing rotas, training records, audits and team meetings. We also looked at records of recruitment and supervision for four support workers. We spoke with the registered manager and two support workers.
We contacted four health and social care professionals involved in the planning of people’s care and heard back from all of them.
Updated
27 April 2018
We carried out this announced inspection on 14 March 2018. At our last inspection in January 2016 we rated this service ‘good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘good’.
36 Huddleston Close is a care home for up to three people with learning disabilities which is managed by Mencap. At the time of our inspection there remained two men using the service. The service is a small purpose built home, with a large shared kitchen and lounge, a small garden, two bedrooms and two rooms for staff.
The service adjoins 34-35 Huddleston Close, which is also a service managed by Mencap and shares a registered manager, who had been in post since 2014 and jointly managed both services. 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.
Since our inspection there had been some changes to people’s needs, particularly with regards to health conditions. The service worked well with other professionals in order to meet the person’s needs and support them to access health appointments. There were measures in place such as communication books and hospital passports to support the person to stay in hospital when required. People were supported to eat and drink well.
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 support this practice. Medicines were safely managed with systems in place to protect people from mistakes.
The staff team had effective strategies for communicating with people and supporting them to express their needs. There were positive behavioural support plans which were effective in reducing incidents of behaviour which may challenge. The service promoted positive risk taking, and had risk management plans for supporting people to access activities whilst recognising the benefits to the person of doing so. People were safeguarded from abuse and poor care.
Staff received suitable training to carry out their roles and were recruited in line with safer recruitment processes. Staffing levels were adequate to meet people’s needs and were reviewed as people’s needs changed. There were procedures to maintain a safe environment which met people’s needs.
People’s needs were assessed with plans and guidelines in place to make sure people received the right support. Staff worked with people to develop their skills, independence and to encourage people to carry out meaningful activities.
Managers had a clear vision for promoting the provider’s values amongst the staff team and systems in place to monitor the care people received and the quality of the service.