We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hibernia on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Hibernia, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
On arrival we were asked to sanitise our hands, sign in, have our temperature taken and asked if we had symptoms of, or been in contact with anyone who had symptoms of, COVID-19. We were also asked to show our vaccination record and evidence of a lateral flow device test taken that day. Face masks were available at the door should they be needed, and visitors were only admitted to the service after following these procedures.
The provider had supported people to create personalised scrapbooks of their pandemic experiences which enabled people to reflect back and share their experiences with their friends and family.
The provider had developed close links with their community and local healthcare professionals. They told us how supportive these links had been to the home and how they were supported to access any healthcare services as they needed to.
Hibernia provide accommodation and personal care and support for up to five adults who have learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. The accommodation is spread over two floors. There were five people living in the home at the time of our 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.
This inspection took place on 12 December 2018 and was unannounced.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing 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 this inspection we found the service remained Good.
The atmosphere throughout the home was friendly, calm and caring. The staff spoke about people in a respectful manner and demonstrated understanding of their individual needs.
Staff understood how to identify, report and manage any concerns related to people’s safety and welfare. There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm, including how medicines were managed.
There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home.
Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were trained, supervised and appraised. There was an induction, training and development programme, which supported staff to gain relevant knowledge and skills.
People were supported to have 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.
People received regular and on-going health checks and support to attend appointments. They were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices about what they ate.
The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff were prompt to raise issues about people’s health so that people were referred to health professionals when needed. There were systems in place to help ensure any concerns or complaints were responded to appropriately.
People were supported to do the things that interested them, maintain relationships and to participate in community activities.
The provider and registered manager demonstrated an open management style and provided leadership to the staff team. There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate support.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
We inspected the home on 8 April 2016. The inspection was announced 24 hours in advance because the service was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day. There were five people living in the home at the time of our inspection.
This was the first inspection of Hibernia since the current provider took over the running of the service in June 2014.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with 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.
Relatives we spoke with were confident their family members were safe. People were cared for by staff in ways that met their needs and maintained their dignity and respect. Staff understood how to identify, report and manage any concerns related to people’s safety and welfare. There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm, including how medicines were managed.
Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home. There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to meet people’s needs.
Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were trained, supervised and appraised. There was an induction, training and development programme, which supported staff to gain relevant knowledge and skills.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. Where people’s liberty or freedoms were at risk of being restricted, the proper authorisations were in place or had been applied for.
People and their relatives were involved in planning the care and support provided by the service. Staff listened to people and understood and respected their needs. Staff reflected people’s wishes and preferences in the way they delivered care. They understood the issues involved in supporting people who had lost capacity to make some decisions.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices about what they ate. Staff ensured people obtained advice and support from other health professionals to maintain and improve their health or when their needs changed.
The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what they said. Concerns or complaints were responded to appropriately. People were encouraged and supported to engage in activities and events that gave them an opportunity to socialise.
There was a friendly, homely atmosphere and staff supported people in a kind and caring way that took account of their individual needs and preferences. The staff and management team shared common values about the purpose of the service. People were supported and encouraged to live as independently as possible, according to their needs and abilities.
There was an open and inclusive culture within the service, which encouraged people’s involvement and their feedback was used to drive improvements. The registered manager demonstrated an open management style and provided leadership to the staff team. There was a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate support.