Archived: Redehall Cottage

Updated 7 February 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.

This inspection took place on 12 January 2017 and was unannounced. It was conducted by one inspector who was experienced in care and support for people with learning disabilities.

Before the inspection, we reviewed all the information we held about the provider. This included information sent to us by the provider in the form of notifications and safeguarding adult referrals made to the local authority. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

Before the inspection, the registered manager 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 used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. We spoke with one person, two relatives, three staff members, the registered manager, the residential service manager.

We spent time observing care and support provided throughout the day of inspection, at lunch time and in the communal areas. We reviewed a variety of documents which included two people’s support plans, risk assessments, and peoples medicine administration records (MAR). We also reviewed four weeks of duty rotas, some health and safety records and quality assurance records. We also looked at a range of the provider’s policy documents. We asked the registered manager to send us some additional information following our visit, which they did.

Updated 7 February 2017

Redehall Cottage is a residential care home accommodating up to six adults with learning disabilities, communication needs and autism. There were four people living at the home at the time of inspection.

People had communication needs. Some people could use key words to communicate their needs; other people used body language or gestures to communicate.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

At the last inspection on 6 October 2015, we told the provider to take action on staff deployment, management of risks to people and good governance. We also told the provider to ensure that processes were in place to ensure that people’s rights were protected if they lacked mental capacity. We found improvements had been made and these actions have been completed.

There were sufficient staff to keep people safe. There were recruitment practises in place to ensure that staff were safe to work with people.

People were protected from avoidable harm. Staff received training in safeguarding adults and were able to demonstrate that they knew the procedures to follow should they have any concerns.

People’s medicines were administered, stored and disposed of safely. Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines and kept relevant and accurate records. For people who had ‘as required’ medicine, there were guidelines in place to tell staff when and how to administer them.

Staff had written information about risks to people and how to manage these. Risk assessments were in place for a variety of tasks such as personal care, health, and activities and they were updated frequently. The registered manager ensured that actions had been taken after incidents and accidents occurred to reduce the likely hood of them happening again.

People’s human rights were protected as the registered manager ensured that the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were followed. Where people were assessed to lack capacity to make some decisions, mental capacity assessment and best interest meetings had been undertaken. Staff were heard to ask peoples consent before they provided care.

Where people’s liberty may be restricted to keep them safe, the provider had followed the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure the person’s rights were protected.

People had sufficient to eat and drink. People were offered a choice of what they would like to eat and drink. People’s weights were monitored on a regular basis to ensure that people remained healthy.

People were supported to maintain their health and well-being. People had regular access to health and social care professionals.

Staff were trained and had sufficient skills and knowledge to support people effectively. There was a training programme in place to meet people’s needs. There was an induction programme in place which included staff undertaking the Care Certificate. Staff received supervision., however it was not always regular. The registered manager told us that they would start supervisions now.

People were well cared for and positive relationships had been established between people and staff. Staff interacted with people in a kind and caring manner.

Relatives and health professionals were involved in planning peoples care. People’s choices and views were respected by staff. Staff and the registered manager knew people’s choices and preferences. People’s privacy and dignity was respected.

People received a personalised service. Care and support was person centred and this was reflected in their care plans. Care plans contained sufficient detail for staff to support people effectively. People were supported to develop their independence.

There were activities in place which people enjoyed. The registered manager told us that they wanted to improve what activities were on offer for two people.

The home listened to staff and relative’s views. There was a complaints procedure in place. There had been no complaints since the last inspection.

The management promoted an open and person centred culture. Staff told us they felt supported by the manager. Relatives told us they felt that the management was approachable and responsive.

There were robust procedures in place to monitor, evaluate and improve the quality of care provided. Staff were motivated and aware of their responsibilities. The manager understood the requirements of CQC and sent in appropriate notifications.