Archived: Dawson House

Updated 25 February 2016

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 28 January 2016 and was unannounced. It was carried out by a single inspector. Before the inspection we reviewed information about the service such as notifications about events and incidents that occurred in the home, that they are required to submit to CQC.

During our inspection the majority of people using the service were unable to share their experiences with us due to their complex needs. In order to understand their experiences of using the service we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with the manager and three care support workers. We looked at records which included three people’s care records, three staff files and other records relating to the management of the service.

After the visit we contacted four relatives of people living at Dawson House to ask them for their views and experiences of the service.

Updated 25 February 2016

This inspection took place on 28 January 2016 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in April 2014 we found the service was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Dawson House is a small home which provides care and accommodation for up to seven adults with learning disabilities, autism and complex communication needs. At the time of our inspection there were seven people living at the home.

The service is required to have a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager left the service in November 2015. The provider appointed a new manager immediately. The new manager had submitted their application to CQC to become the registered manager for the home, which was being processed.

Relatives told us people were safe at Dawson House. Staff knew how to protect people if they suspected they were at risk of abuse or harm. They had received training in safeguarding adults at risk. They knew how and when to report their concerns if they suspected someone was at risk of abuse. They had also received training to ensure people were protected from discriminatory behaviour and practices that could cause them harm.

Staff had access to appropriate guidance to ensure identified risks to people were minimised to keep people safe from injury or harm. Staff were aware of the specific risks to each person and what they should do to protect them. Regular maintenance and service checks were carried out of the premises to ensure the environment and equipment was safe. The provider had put measures in place to ensure risks posed by the environment were minimised. Staff kept the home free of obstacles and objects so that people could move freely and safely around.

There were enough suitable staff to support people. Staffing levels were planned to ensure there was a good mix of experienced and suitable staff on every shift to meet people’s needs. The provider carried out appropriate checks on staff to ensure they were suitable and fit to work at the home. Staff received relevant training to help them in their roles. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and how these should be met. Staff felt well supported by senior staff and were provided with opportunities to share their views about how people's experiences could be improved.

People were supported to keep healthy and well. Staff regularly monitored people's food and drink intake to ensure people were eating and drinking enough. Specialist diets were catered for and appropriate support was obtained for people with specific needs or conditions. Staff ensured people were able to promptly access healthcare services when this was needed. Medicines were stored safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed.

People had support plans which reflected their specific needs and preferences for how they were cared for and supported. These gave staff guidance and instructions on how people’s needs should be met. People were appropriately supported by staff to make decisions about their care and support needs and encouraged by staff to be as independent as they could be. Staff used different methods of communication to ensure people could be involved in making these decisions.

Relatives said staff were kind and caring. Staff acted appropriately to minimise distress or anxiety experienced by people. They were respectful of people’s privacy and dignity when supporting them. Staff were welcoming and relatives said they were free to visit the home with no restrictions. People were encouraged to maintain relationships with people that were important to them and to undertake social activities and outings of their choosing. People were supported to raise any concerns and there were arrangements in place to deal with their concerns or complaints, appropriately.

Relatives told us the service was managed well. The new manager demonstrated good leadership. They ensured people’s views were sought about how the care and support they received could be improved. They met regularly with staff and checked they were clear about their duties and responsibilities to the people they cared for and accountable for how they supported people to meet their care goals and objectives.

The provider and manager carried out regular checks of key aspects of the service to monitor and assess the safety and quality of the service that people experienced. The manager took appropriate action to make changes and improvements when this was needed. The service used external scrutiny and challenge to ensure that appropriate care and support for people on the autistic spectrum was being provided.

The provider had procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff had received training to understand when an application should be made and how to submit one. This helped to ensure people were safeguarded as required by the legislation. DoLS provides a process to make sure that people are only deprived of their liberty in a safe and correct way, when it is in their best interests and there is no other way to look after them. Applications made to deprive people of their liberty had been properly made and authorised by the appropriate body. The provider was complying with the condition applied to the authorisation.