Archived: Royal Mencap Society - 5 Saunton Gardens

Updated 24 August 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, looked at the overall quality of the service, and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. A service provider is the legal organisation responsible for carrying on the adult social care services we regulate.

This unannounced inspection took place on 5 July 2018, when the registered manager was absent due to annual leave. We continued the inspection on 9 July 2018, when the registered manager had returned. When planning the inspection visit we took account of the size of the service and that some people at the home could find unfamiliar visitors unsettling. As a result, this inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We reviewed other information we held about the service, for example, statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We also reviewed information contained within the provider’s website.

During our inspection we spoke with three people living at the home, some of whom had limited verbal communication. We used a range of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service who were not always able to tell us about their experience. These included observations and pathway tracking. Pathway tracking is a process which enables us to look in detail at the care received by an individual in the home. We pathway tracked the care of three people.

Throughout the inspection we observed how staff interacted and cared for people across the course of the day, including mealtimes, during activities and when medicines were administered. We spoke with the management team, including the registered manager, the area operations manager, the regional manager and three members of staff covering the day and night shifts.

We reviewed each person’s care records, which included their daily notes, care plans and medicine administration records (MARs). We looked at four staff recruitment, supervision and training files. We examined the provider’s records which demonstrated how people’s care reviews, staff supervisions, appraisals and required training were arranged.

We also looked at the provider’s policies and procedures and other records relating to the management of the service, such as staff rotas covering June and July 2018, health and safety audits, medicine management audits, infection control audits, emergency contingency plans and minutes of staff meetings. We considered how people’s, relatives’ and staff comments were used to drive improvements in the service.

Following the visit we spoke with the four relatives of the three people and two health and social care professionals. These health and social care professionals were involved in the support of people living at the home. We also spoke with the commissioners of people’s care.

The last inspection took place in May 2016 where we found the provider’s failure to manage people’s medicines safely was a breach of regulation 12 (2) (g) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Updated 24 August 2018

Royal Mencap Society 5 Saunton Gardens provides accommodation and personal care to a maximum of five people who live with a learning disability, autism and/or associated health needs, who may experience behaviours that challenge staff.

At the time of inspection three people were living at the home. The service is located in a residential home that has been developed and adapted in line with values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can lead as ordinary life as any citizen.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 5 and 9 July 2018. The inspection was unannounced, which meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At our last inspection in November 2016 we found the provider was required to improve the management of people’s prescribed medicines. At this inspection we found the provider had made the required improvements and people’s prescribed medicines were managed safely.

People were protected from avoidable harm, neglect, abuse and discrimination by staff who understood their responsibilities to safeguard people. Risks to people had been assessed and plans minimised potential risks, whilst promoting people’s independence.

Prospective staff underwent robust pre-employment checks to ensure they were suitable support people who lived with autism or a learning disability.

There were always enough staff deployed with the right experience and skills mix, to provide effective care and support to meet people’s needs. Staff were enabled to develop and maintain the necessary skills to meet people’s needs.

Staff applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in their day to day care practice. For example, people were involved in best interests decisions about their care, to ensure their human and legal rights were protected.

The registered manager had developed effective partnerships with relevant professionals and quickly referred people to external services such as GPs, neurologists, dieticians, chiropodists, opticians and dentists, when required to maintain their health.

Staff supported people to maintain high standards of cleanliness and hygiene in the home, which reduced the risk of infection. Staff followed required standards of food safety and hygiene, when preparing or handling food. People were supported to have eat healthy balanced diet of their choice.

The home environment was personalised to meet people's individual needs and preferences.

People’s needs had been assessed and regularly reviewed to ensure staff had the most current information required to meet their needs. Detailed care plans promoted their independence and opportunities to maximise their potential.

People were supported by regular staff who were kind and caring, which had a positive impact on their mental wellbeing. There was a warm and positive atmosphere within the service, where people were relaxed and reassured by the presence of staff.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and were sensitive to their needs regarding equality, diversity and their human rights. People were encouraged and enabled to be involved as much as possible in making decisions about how their support needs were met.

Staff demonstrated a real empathy for the people they cared for and one another. Staff spoke passionately about people, recognising their talents and achievements, which demonstrated how they valued them as individuals.

The service was responsive and involved people and their relatives in developing their support plans, which were detailed and personalised to ensure their individual preferences were known.

Staff consistently demonstrated in their day to day support of people, that respect for privacy and dignity was at the heart of the home’s culture and values. People were supported to take part in activities that they enjoyed and to maintain relationships with their families and those that mattered to them. This helped to protect them from the risk of social isolation.

The registered manager sought the views of people and their relatives and used these to drive improvement in the home. There had been no complaints since the last inspection. However, people and relatives were confident that the staff would listen to them if they had any concerns and would take the necessary action to deal with them.

The service was well led. The vision, values and culture of the service were understood and delivered by staff whilst supporting people. The safety and quality of support people received was effectively monitored and identified shortfalls were acted upon to drive continuous improvement in the service.