Archived: Care Management Group - 33 Egmont Road

33, Egmont Road is a ‘care home’ providing personal care and accommodation to people living with mild to moderate learning disabilities. The service can support up to six people. The care home accommodated five people the time of this inspection in one adapted building. There was a mix of male and female adults who had been living in the home for more than two years and up to ten years for some people. Their ages ranged from mid 20s to middle age.

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 and what we found:

Relatives told us they thought their family members were safe living in this home and that staff were kind to them.

Staff received training to do with safeguarding adults and the provider followed clear safeguarding procedures that helped to protect people from harm. Whistleblowing procedures were in place and displayed on notice boards for all to see. Staff told us they were confident any concerns they reported would be dealt with appropriately.

Risks to people, including those associated with their healthcare needs, were assessed and plans were in place to reduce them.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

Effective infection control procedures were in place and staff received training with food hygiene.

There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and safe recruitment practices were in place.

People’s medicines were stored, administered, recorded and audited appropriately. The provider had appropriate policies and procedures in place to support people safely with their medicines as prescribed.

Comprehensive needs assessments were carried out and people’s needs were met in a personalised way.

Staff completed training to ensure they were able to meet people’s needs effectively. Support was provided appropriately for staff with regards to their professional roles.

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.

Records showed people were supported to have their health needs met, with access to health professionals as required.

Relatives of people told us their relationships with the staff team was good. They said their privacy and dignity was respected. They also said they were able to express their views and preferences and staff responded appropriately.

There were systems in place to ensure concerns and complaints were responded to in an appropriate way.

Comprehensive quality assurance processes were in place that monitored a wide scope of practice and procedure by staff, identified shortfalls and drove improvements. The provider worked collaboratively with other agencies and organisations to meet people’s needs.

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

Rating at the last inspection

At the last inspection the service was rated Good (published 27 January 2017).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection in line with our inspection schedule based on the previous rating.

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.

33, Egmont Road provides care and accommodation for up to six people with moderate learning disabilities. On the day of the inspection five people lived at the home.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They had a good understanding of the ethos of the service.

Systems were in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service and to get the views of people about the service. These measures of monitoring the service has helped to make improvements were necessary.

People and their relatives told us they felt people were well cared for and safe, living at 33, Egmont Road. Staff knew how to help protect people if they suspected they were at risk of abuse or harm. Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing had been assessed and staff knew how to minimise risks and manage identified hazards in order to help keep people safe from harm or injury.

There were sufficient levels of staff to meet people’s needs. This was endorsed by people we spoke with and their relatives.

People received their medicines appropriately and staff knew how to manage medicines safely.

Staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS provides a process to make sure people are only deprived of their liberty in a safe and correct way. Appropriate policies and procedures were in place in relation to this and applications were made to the local authorities for those people who needed them. Staff supported people to make choices and decisions about their care wherever they had the capacity to do so.

People had a varied and nutritious diet and a choice of meals. They were supported to have a balanced diet which helped them to stay healthy.

Staff supported people to maintain health through regular monitoring by healthcare professionals.

Staff were consistently kind and caring and established positive relationships with people and their families.

Staff valued people, treated them with respect and promoted their rights, choice and independence.

Comprehensive care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and had been produced jointly with people using the service. People had agreed what care and support they needed and were fully involved in making decisions about their support.

People were able to choose how they spent their time and what activities they participated with. People participated in a range of activities within the home or in the community and received the support they needed to help them to do this. Some people had been supported to find voluntary work and employment.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people felt confident to raise any concerns either with the staff or the registered manager if they needed to. The complaints procedure was available in different formats so that it was accessible to everyone.

People using the service and their relatives were encouraged to give feedback on the service. Relatives said the registered manager encouraged feedback and sought to develop and improve the service for people. Staff told us they felt well supported and enjoyed working in a positive environment.

People we spoke with told us about what they were doing that day, what holidays they were going on and the activities they enjoyed. One person told us 'I like to see my friends and go out for meals' and another person told us they were about to go shopping and what they intended to buy and another told us about a planned holiday to the Isle of White.

We were able to observe that people's experience of the service was a positive one. During our inspection we saw staff always treated people with respect and dignity and people were supported to make informed decisions about how they lived their lives. One person told us they had gone bowling that morning and told us what they had chosen to eat for lunch.

We saw that policies and procedures had been put in place to ensure the safety and well-being of people using the service and we saw evidence of a quality assurance system regularly monitored by the provider.

People were involved in their care and their independence was promoted. Each person was engaged in activities according to their wishes for them to lead as fulfilling a life as possible. Care records were in an easy read format to make these more accessible to people. People had signed their support plans to show their involvement when these were developed but had not always signed their risk assessments.

People's progress notes were detailed about the care they received. Some records required to demonstrate that people were receiving safe and appropriate care were not always available. Records about people's weight and their appointments with healthcare professionals were not available, so staff had the necessary information to support them where required.

There were plans in place to improve the d'cor of the home but actions had not always been taken in a timely manner when issues were identified to ensure the comfort and wellbeing of people. We found that action had not been taken to keep two rooms warm, where the radiators were not working.