Archived: Blackdown House

Updated 22 September 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act.

This was a targeted inspection to check on a specific concern we had about assessing risk, safety monitoring and management. We also looked at infection control to ensure the correct Infection Prevention and Control measures were in place.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Blackdown House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection to ensure we could manage the risks related to COVID 19.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us 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 used this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

Due to Covid 19 guidelines around inspecting in a campus setting we carried out a short site visit to the service to observe infection control practices. We requested the documentation we required be provided for us at a safe location provided by the service. We reviewed the care plans and risk assessments for two people, staff training and supervision records relating to managing risk. During the visit we spoke with the deputy manager, lead manager, area manager and quality manager. We later spoke with four staff members and the home manager using virtual meetings.

Updated 22 September 2020

We undertook an unannounced inspection of Blackdown House on 31 July 2018.

When the service was last inspected in June 2017, two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 were identified. These related to the agreed conditions of one person's Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation was not being fully met and the provider’s quality assurance systems were not always effective in ensuring that all areas for improvement were identified or that improvements were made.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions, Effective and Well led to at least good.

The provider wrote to us in August 2017 and told us how they would achieve compliance with the regulations. During this inspection we found the identified improvements had been made.

Blackdown House 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.

Blackdown House is a large detached bungalow situated in the extensive grounds of Somerset Court, along with five of the providers other homes. Somerset Court is described as a ‘campus’ setting. Campuses are a group homes clustered together on the same site and usually sharing staff and some facilities. Staff are available 24 hours a day. The campus model does not meet the underlying principles of the Registering the Right Support guidance. This model of care would be reviewed and scrutinised in line with the principles of Registering the Right Support guidance by CQC, if an application were to be received at this moment in time. Although Blackdown House was situated in a campus setting, we found the service was working in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support 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.

The home accommodates up to 12 people who have autism and complex support needs.

The home comprises of the main building and two self-contained flats attached to the home. During our inspection there were five people living in the main part of the home and one person living in each of the flats.

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. The registered manager was not available on the day of the inspection, the deputy manager, a covering manager from one of the provider’s other homes and senior managers were present for the inspection.

Relatives told us they thought their family members were safe living at Blackdown. People were protected from abuse because staff understood the correct procedure to follow if they had any concerns. Staff informed us they were confident concerns would be followed up if they were raised. People appeared happy in the company of the staff.

Risks to people were ¿assessed and managed. People received effective support from staff to help them manage at times when they became anxious. Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and accidents.

Medicines were stored and administered safely, where there had been medicines errors in the past, learning from this had been implemented.

Although we received some mixed feedback from relatives relating to the staffing of the home, we found there were suitable staff available.

Staff were recruited safely and received on-going training and support to ensure they had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support people. Staff were aware of the measures in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

Consent to care and treatment was sought in line with legislation and guidance. Where restrictive practices had been identified, such as medicines being locked away, these were reviewed to ensure they were the least restrictive option.

People were involved in planning their menus and supported to be involved in preparing their meals.

Staff monitored people’s health and well-being and made sure they had access to other healthcare professionals according to their individual needs.

People’s diverse needs were supported; staff described how they supported people with their cultural needs.

Staff had built trusting relationships with people. Staff interactions with people were positive and caring.

Staff knew people and understood their care and support needs. People were supported by staff to plan and achieve their goals. Relatives were involved in reviewing their family members care and support.

There was a management structure in the home, which provided clear lines of responsibility and ¿accountability.

The provider had notified the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of significant events in line with current legislation. This meant external agencies were able to monitor the care and safety of people using the service.

The provider had systems in place that were effective in identifying shortfalls in the service and developing action plans to address these.