Magnolia House

Updated 14 November 2020

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.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

This inspection took place on 28 October 2020 and was announced. The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

Updated 14 November 2020

This inspection was carried out on 23 February 2017, and was an announced inspection. The provider was given one working days’ notice because the location provides a care service to a small number of people and we needed to be sure that someone would be available at the location to see us.

Magnolia House is a residential home providing care and support for up to six people with learning disabilities, autism and some people had limited verbal communication. The service is arranged over two floors and is wheelchair accessible. The provider organisation is a company that has other services across the South and East of England. At the time of our inspection, six ladies lived at the service.

At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection on 26 March 2015, the service was rated Good in all domains and overall.

At this inspection we found the service remained good.

The safety of people using the service continued to be taken seriously by the management team and staff who understood their responsibility to protect people’s health and well-being. Staff and the management team had received training about protecting people from abuse, and they knew what action to take if they suspected abuse. Systems were in place to protect people’s finances from potential misuse.

Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and measures put into place to manage any hazards identified. Staff followed appropriate guidance to minimise identified risks to people’s health, safety and welfare. The premises were maintained and checked to help ensure people’s safety. Medicines were managed safely and people received them as prescribed.

There were enough staff on duty with the right skills to meet people’s needs. Staff had been trained to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practices were safe and checks were carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who needed care and support.

People’s needs had been assessed to identify the care and support they required. Care and support was planned with people and their relatives and regularly reviewed to ensure people continued to have the support they needed. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who also maintained people’s privacy.

Staff had a full understanding of people’s care and support needs and had the skills and knowledge to meet them. People received consistent support from the same members of staff who knew them well. People were supported to be fully involved in the care and support they received and, decisions relating to their lives.

People had access to the food that they enjoyed and were able to access drinks and snacks throughout the day. People’s nutrition and hydration needs had been assessed and recorded. Staff met people’s specific dietary needs. Staff ensured people remained as healthy as possible with support from health care professionals, if required.

People and their relatives were involved and asked for suggestions of ways the service could be improved, these were acted on. People and their relatives had access to a compliant policy and procedure. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people. People participated in activities of their choice within the service and the local community. People were actively encouraged to maintain and increase their independence. The provider ensured the complaints procedure was made available in an accessible format if people wished to make a complaint. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The management team and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.