Orchard View

Orchard View is a residential care home that was providing accommodation and personal care for up to five younger people, some of whom may have a mental health diagnosis, or may be living with a physical or learning disability. There were five people using the service at the time of the inspection.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were at the very heart of the service. Staff promoted people's right to make choices in every aspect of their lives and actively supported them to maintain their independence.

People were treated with dignity and respect in a way that truly valued them as individuals. The registered manager and all staff, whatever their role, were always prepared to go the extra mile to ensure people received the care they needed and lived full and meaningful lives. People’s diversity was completely respected, embraced and embedded in practice and staff had an excellent understanding of people’s cultural diversity.

The staff and the management team were passionate about providing people with support that was based on their individual needs, goals and aspirations. As a result, their care was tailored to meet their exact needs.

The staff at Orchard View were committed to making sure people lived fulfilling lives and were highly motivated with a 'can do' approach which meant they were able to achieve positive outcomes for people. Without exception, people spoke positively about their experience of the service and the successes they had been supported to achieve.

It was clear the culture within the service valued the uniqueness of all individuals who lived there. The service used person centred and innovative ways to provide people with the support they needed, based on best practice.

The service took a key role in the local community and was actively involved in building further links. People had expressed a wish to give back to their local community and had been supported to go out litter picking.

The arrangements for social activities, and where appropriate education and work, were inventive and met people’s individual needs. People had been supported to gain paid and voluntary work and the provider provided training for people to increase their skills and confidence.

There was a high level of satisfaction with the service and people were well supported to express their views, so improvements could be made. There was strong leadership that put people first and set high expectations for staff.

We found an open ethos with a clear vision and values which were put into practice by staff, who were proud to work for the service and felt valued for their work. A very positive culture was demonstrated by the attitudes of staff and management when we talked with them about how they supported people.

There were systems in place to make sure the service was safe, with very good staffing levels and highly skilled staff to deliver good quality care.

Risks to people were fully assessed and well managed. People were supported to take positive risks, to make sure they had greater choice and control of their lives. The positive risk-taking approach showed that staff respected people's right for independence and their right to take risks.

People were fully involved and supported to safely recruit staff to work at the service. This ensured that successful applicants had the right values and skills to match the values that were at the heart of the service.

Staff were trained in infection control and the safe administration of medicines. There were robust arrangements in place for the service to make sure that action was taken, and lessons learned when things went wrong, to improve safety across the service.

People’s needs, and choices were assessed, and their care provided in line with their preferences. Staff received an induction process when they first commenced work at the service and received on-going training to ensure they could provide care based on current practice when supporting people.

People were supported to be independent in shopping, preparing and cooking their own meals. Staff supported people to access health appointments when required, including opticians and doctors, to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.

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. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

More information is in Detailed Findings below.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 21 October 2016)

Why we inspected: This inspection was scheduled for follow up based on the last report rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about the service. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

There was not a registered manager in post, however an application had been received by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and this was being assessed at the time of the inspection. 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.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff that were experienced and supported to carry out their roles to meet the needs of people living at the home. Staff had received on-going training in key areas that enabled them to understand and meet the care needs of people living in the home. Appropriate recruitment procedures were followed and people were protected from receiving unsafe care from care staff unsuited to their role.

People’s care and support needs were regularly monitored and reviewed to ensure that care was provided in the way that they needed. People had detailed individual plans of care in place to guide staff in the delivery of their care and support. People had been involved in developing these plans of care which meant that people received consistent and personalised care and support.

People’s health and well-being was monitored by staff and they were supported to access relevant health professionals. People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink to maintain a balanced diet. People were encouraged where possible to prepare their own meals.

Staff took time to get to know people and ensured that people’s care was tailored to their individual needs. People had the information they needed to make a complaint and the service had processes in place to respond to any complaints.

People were supported by a team of staff that had the managerial guidance and support they needed to carry out their roles. Staff were encouraged to make suggestions about the running of the service. The quality of the service was monitored by the audits regularly carried out by the registered manager and by the provider. There was a clear and shared aim to promote and increase the independence of the people living in the home.