Archived: Homeville

Updated 7 November 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:

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

Homeville 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, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. Once registered, this means 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:

The inspection was announced. We gave 70 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because the service is small, and people are often out, and we wanted to be sure there would be people at home to speak with us.

What we did before the inspection:

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection:

We met the person who lived at the service and observed staff supporting them to plan their day. We spoke to the manager, the head of care, a carer and a visiting therapist.

We looked at one person’s care plan, daily notes and medicines records. We looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service including, health and safety records, audits and quality assurance reports.

After the inspection:

We telephoned a relative to gain their experience of the care provided.

Updated 7 November 2019

About the service:

Homeville is a residential care home that accommodates one person with a learning disability, autism and complex needs.

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 Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism.

Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.

The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff knew people well and gave them the reassurances they needed so they felt safe and any anxieties reduced. Staff and mangers knew how to recognise and report potential abuse to safeguard people.

Staff understood people's conditions and needs well and responded to provide the support they needed. Risks to people had been identified and risk assessments contained strategies to mitigate risks.

People's care was based on their needs and preferences. People were supported to do things they enjoyed

and independently choose how to spend their time. Care plans contained detailed information to guide staff how to provide the support people needed.

Medicines were stored and managed safely. Policies and procedures supported the safe administration of

medicines. People received their medicines when they needed them and staff who gave medicines were

trained and their competency checked.

Staff sought consent before providing care and knew the process to help those who lacked capacity to make decisions. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff received training and support they required to enable them to fulfil their roles. Staff were recognised for their contributions and felt valued members of the staff team.

Feedback was regularly sought from people, relatives and staff about how the service could improve for people’s benefit. Managers understood and met their regulatory responsibilities.

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

Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was Good (published 27 February 2017).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.