Background to this inspection
Updated
21 March 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type
Elmdon House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. The registered manager was available for part the inspection, as was the project manager and head of residential care for the Midway Care Group.
Notice of inspection
This inspection was unannounced.
What we did before the inspection
Before the inspection we reviewed information we had received about the service. This information included ‘notifications’ the provider had sent to CQC. A notification is information about important events, which the service is required to send us by law. The provider had not been asked to complete a provider information return (PIR) prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We met with the three people who lived at Elmdon House but because they each had communication difficulties, they were unable to give us verbal feedback about their life at Elmdon House. We observed the interactions between them and the staff who looked after them. We spoke with one senior support worker, a support worker, the registered manager, project manager and head of residential care.
We looked at the three people's care records, two staff recruitment files, training records, policies and procedures, and other records relating to the running of the home.
After the inspection
We spoke with two relatives and two health or social care professionals. Their views and comments have been included in the main body of the report.
Updated
21 March 2020
About the service
Elmdon House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to six people with a diagnosis of a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. The property is a large family type home that has been extended and adapted to provide additional bedrooms and living space. At the time of the inspection three people were living there.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were looked after safely. Staff received safeguarding adults training and knew how to report any safeguarding concerns to the local authority or CQC. Risks to people’s health and welfare were assessed and management plans in place to reduce or eliminate any risks. Staffing numbers on duty each shift was kept under continual review and adjusted as and when necessary.
The provider followed safe recruitment procedures to ensure they only employed suitable staff. People received their medicines as prescribed. Medicines were well managed and administered by those staff who had been trained and were competent.
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 received personalised care based on their assessed support needs and their preferred way of spending their time. Each person had a care plan which set out how they were to be looked after. Staff received the training they needed to enable them to do their job well. For new staff there was an induction training programme and other staff had a mandatory refresher training programme to complete. Staff were well supported to do their job and received a regular supervision session with a senior member of staff.
People were assisted by the staff team to access any healthcare services. People received the food and drink they needed to maintain a healthy, balanced diet. Any preferences they had regarding food and drink were accommodated.
People were encouraged to retain as much choice and control of their daily lives and staff supported them in their best interests. The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
People were looked after by a small team of support workers who were kind and caring. People were content in the home environment and their interactions with the staff team were calm and friendly. People were encouraged to make their own decisions about how they spent their time but best interests’ decisions were made and recorded when the person lacked the capacity to make important decisions. Those staff we met were kind, friendly and genuinely cared for the three people.
People were provided with a personalised service that was responsive to their specific care and support needs. The support team were able to determine whether people were unhappy by acting upon facial expressions, body language and understanding of behaviours exhibited. Whilst meaningful social activities were encouraged, the support team respected people’s wishes not to leave their home where they feel safe.
The registered manager provided good leadership and management of the staff team but also managed other care services. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service for the three people, the staff team and any visitors to the service. The staff worked well with other health and social care services and ensured they kept up to date with best practice.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published November 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based upon 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.