Background to this inspection
Updated
10 February 2022
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.
As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at how services manage infection control and visiting arrangements. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.
This inspection took place on 20 January 2022 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours notice of the inspection.
Updated
10 February 2022
Royal Mencap Society 17 Flaxfield Road provides accommodation and personal care to a maximum of five people who live with a learning disability, autism and/or associated health needs, who may experience behaviours that challenge staff.
At the time of inspection five people were living at the home. The service is in a residential home that has been developed and adapted in line with 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 lead as ordinary life as any citizen.
The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
This comprehensive inspection took place on 15 and 19 November 2018. The inspection was unannounced, which meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going 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.
People were protected from avoidable harm and discrimination by staff who had completed relevant training and understood their responsibilities to safeguard people. Risks to people had been identified, assessed and were managed to keep people safe, whilst promoting their freedom.
There were always enough staff deployed to provide safe care to meet people’s individual needs. Staff had been assessed to ensure they were suitable to support people who lived with a learning disability.
Staff had completed an effective induction programme and the provider’s required training, which enabled them to develop and maintain the necessary skills to meet people’s needs. The registered manager provided effective support to staff through a system of supervision, appraisal and competency assessments.
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 completed effective best interests decision processes to ensure people’s human rights were protected.
People were referred promptly to relevant healthcare professionals when required to maintain their health.
People were supported to have enough to eat and drink, to maintain a healthy, balanced diet of their choice. Staff supported people to maintain high standards of cleanliness and hygiene in the home, which reduced the risk of infection. People and staff followed the required standards when preparing or handling food.
The home environment was personalised to meet people's individual needs and preferences.
People’s assessed needs were regularly reviewed and any changes were discussed at shift handovers. This ensured staff had the most current information required to meet their needs.
There was a warm, family atmosphere within the service, where people and staff treated each other with kindness and respect. People were encouraged and enabled to be involved as much as possible in making decisions about how their support needs were met.
Staff involved people in developing their support plans, which were detailed and personalised to ensure their individual preferences were known. Arrangements for social activities, education and work, met individual needs and enabled people to live as full a life as possible.
The registered manager regularly sought people’s views and used complaints as an opportunity to drive continual improvement in the home.
The service was well managed and well led. Staff were very proud of the service, inspired and motivated by the registered manager to provide quality care to people living there. There were good links to the local community that reflected the needs and preferences of the people who use the service. The provider operated effective performance management processes which were reviewed regularly, and reflected best practice.