Background to this inspection
Updated
29 March 2019
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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team: One inspector carried out the inspection.
Service and service type: Sunderland City Council - 3 Fenwick Close is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The care service 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.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. The registered manager was responsible for the management of all three bungalows at Fenwick Close. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection: We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small. We needed to be sure that they would be in.
What we did: Providers are required to send us key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We reviewed all the information we held about the service, this included notifications of significant changes or events.
We checked for feedback we received from members of the public, local authorities and clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). We also checked Companies House records.
During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, a team leader and one care worker. The people who used the service could not verbally communicate with us. So, we spent time with people to observe how they were supported. We reviewed two people's care records, two staff personnel files, audits and other records about the quality and safety of the service.
After our visit we had telephone conversations with three relatives of people who used the service.
We requested additional evidence to be sent to us after our inspection. This was received and used as part of our inspection.
Updated
29 March 2019
About the service: Sunderland City Council - 3 Fenwick Close was a purpose-built bungalow in a residential street. It was registered for the support of up to three people. Three people were using the service.
People’s experience of using this service: The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support through promoting choice, involving people in their local community and promoting their independence. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
People’s care was personalised to their individual needs. Relatives said their family members received good care. People and staff engaged well with each other; there were many positive interactions between people and staff during our visit.
Relatives and staff told us people were safe. Staff understood their safeguarding and whistle blowing responsibilities; they knew how to raise concerns. Staffing levels ensured staff were available to support people with their individual needs. New staff were recruited safely.
Incidents and accidents were monitored effectively; the findings were analysed to checks for trends and patterns.
Relatives told us the home was clean and well maintained. Staff completed checks to maintain a clean and safe environment. People received the correct medicines at the correct times.
Staff received good support and completed the training they needed. 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. Staff knew people’s needs especially well; this was used effectively to support people to make to make choices and decisions. People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and to access healthcare services.
Detailed assessments were carried out to identify people’s care and support needs; this included considering religious, social and lifestyle needs. The assessment was used to develop individualised care plans. Staff supported people to choose and participate in activities.
Staff and relatives said the home was managed well. The provider was restructuring its services when we inspected, relatives felt this had resulted in high staff turnover. There was a structured and effective approach to quality assurance. There were regular opportunities for people, relatives and staff to give feedback.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Rating at last inspection: Good (the last report was published on 26 July 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor this service and inspect in line with our reinspection schedule for services rated good.