Archived: The Bungalow

Updated 16 May 2017

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.

We carried out this inspection on 19, 20 and 26 April 2017. The provider was given short notice of this inspection because the location is a small care home for people who are often out during the day and we needed to be sure somebody would be in. One inspector carried out this inspection.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the evidence we already held about the service. This included the last inspection report and notifications the provider had sent us. We also contacted the local authority to obtain their views about the service.

During the inspection we spoke with two people who used the service, the service co-ordinator, the assistant team leader, a senior care staff and two care staff. We observed care and support in communal areas and used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk to us. We reviewed three staff files and five people’s care records. We also reviewed training records, quality assurance records, policies, staff duty rotas and maintenance records. After the inspection we spoke with three relatives.

Updated 16 May 2017

The Bungalow is a residential care home for six people who are living with learning disabilities. It is a spacious, purpose built, single floor building with wheelchair access.

At the last inspection in October 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Relatives felt their family member was safe at the service. Staff were knowledgeable about the safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs who were employed through safe recruitment processes. Risk assessments were carried out and management plans put in place to enable people to receive safe care. People received their medicines correctly and as prescribed.

Staff received support through supervisions and training opportunities. The provider was aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and staff were knowledgeable about how to obtain consent. People were supported to eat a nutritionally balanced diet and had access to healthcare professionals as required to meet their day-to-day health needs.

Relatives thought staff were caring. People received care that promoted their privacy and dignity and maintained their independence. Staff were aware of equality and diversity issues.

Staff were aware of people’s support needs and their preferences. A variety of activities were offered and each person had their own weekly activity timetable. The provider had a detailed complaints policy and relatives knew how to make a complaint but had not needed to.

There was a registered manager at the service. Relatives and staff spoke positively about the organisation and the management team. The provider had regular meetings with staff and with people who used the service. People and relatives were asked to give feedback on the service. The provider had various quality assurance systems and issues identified were used to improve the quality of the service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.