Penhayes House

Updated 16 January 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 12 December 2018. The inspection was unannounced and was carried out by one adult social care inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information, we held about the service. This included notifications from the provider and speaking with the local authority contracts and safeguarding teams.

The provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a document which gives the provider the opportunity to tell us about the service. We used information the provider sent us in the PIR to help plan what we would look at during the inspection. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

Some people using the service were unable to speak with us, therefore we observed interactions between staff and people using the service. We spoke with the manager, team leader, and four members of care staff. We also spoke with two relatives and one advocate. We also gained information by email from a further four health professionals.

We spent time looking at records, including two people's care records, four staff recruitment files and records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 16 January 2019

This unannounced inspection took place on 12 December 2018. This was Penhayes House’s first inspection since registering as an adult social care service. Penhayes 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.

Penhayes House is registered to provide care for up to four people who may have an Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and/or learning disability and complex needs. Some of the complex needs may include mental health issues.

The service benefitted from strong leadership. The registered manager was passionate about providing person centred care and this was reflected in every aspect of the service. The registered manager worked in partnership with other organisations and had taken part in several good practice initiatives designed to further develop the service. They were enthusiastic and committed to providing the best outcomes for people using the service.

The service used a 'positive risk' taking approach when assessing people’s risks. All the risk assessments we looked at supported people to remain safe without restricting their freedom or choices and were reviewed to ensure they remained current.

People who used the service told us they felt safe. Staff told us, and records we looked at confirmed, that staff had undertaken training in safeguarding. Policies and procedures were in place to guide staff with any safeguarding concerns.

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. Care plans were person centred and contained the relevant information staff needed to ensure people’s needs were met.

Staff used their knowledge of people’s life histories to help them understand what was important to each person. There was a positive culture of ensuring that people maintained their independence.

Medicines were administered, recorded and stored in a safe manner and all staff who administered medicines had received suitable training to do this.

Staff were subject to checks on their suitability before they were offered employment. Enough staff were employed to ensure that people's needs could be met in a timely manner. People and their relatives told us they felt there were enough staff to keep them safe.

Staff received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support people. People were supported to eat and drink according to their likes and dislikes. Where people needed additional support at meal times this was provided in line with guidance from health professionals.

People were involved in decisions about the care and support they received. People received care and support which ensured they were able to make choices about their day to day lives. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act [MCA] 2005 and how to support people's best interests if they lacked capacity.

The service had an open culture which encouraged communication and learning. People’s communication needs were clearly assessed and detailed in their care plans. This captured the person’s preferred methods of communication and how best to communicate with them. Staff told us how they communicated in a way which was appropriate for each individual they supported.

People, relatives and staff and health professionals were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive improvement. There were policies in place that ensured people would be listened to and treated fairly if they complained about the service.

People were supported to engage in activity programmes. People knew how to complain and there were a range of opportunities for them to raise concerns with the registered manager and designated staff.

Quality assurance audits were carried out to identify any shortfalls within the service and how the service could improve.

Staff helped people to book and attend appointments with healthcare professionals, and supported them to maintain a healthy lifestyle. The service worked with other organisations to ensure that people received coordinated and person-centred care and support.

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 registered manager understood their responsibilities and worked with people who used the service, relatives, staff and the provider to improve the quality and safety of care that was provided. Quality assurance procedures and a programme of audits were in place. There was a strong emphasis on continuous improvement to drive up the quality of service provided at the service.