Archived: Abshot Road

Abshot Road was compliant with the values underpinned in Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People had access to local amenities, facilitates and healthcare services and were supported to access these regularly.

People’s experience of using this service:

• The provider supported staff in providing effective care for people through person-centred care planning, training and supervision. This ensured the provision of best practice guidance and that supported staff to meet people’s individual needs.

• The registered manager and staff fostered an open culture of honesty and transparency. Staff were committed to delivering high quality care which enhanced people’s lives.

• Staff worked in partnership with healthcare professionals and robust risk assessments were in place to ensure the safe delivery of person-centred care.

• People’s rights and freedoms were upheld and staff treated people with dignity and respect. The provider took a proactive approach to inclusivity.

• Where people required additional support to manage anxious, distressed and heightened behaviour, we saw robust care planning and proactive support offered.

• There was a friendly atmosphere in the service and staff were caring and compassionate in their approach towards people. Staff knew people very well and supported people to access the local community and engage in activities of their choice.

• People were supported to achieve their goals and maintain their independence.

• There was a positive culture within the service where people, staff and relatives felt listened to. The registered manager felt supported by the provider and this flowed through the service. Quality assurance systems were in place which ensured high standards were maintained.

• The service met the characteristics of Good across all domains. More information can be found to evidence this in the full report.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated good (15 December 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection that was scheduled to take place in line with Care Quality Commission (CQC) scheduling guidelines for adult social care services.

Follow up: We will review the service in line with our methodology for 'Good' services.

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

Abshot Road is detached property that has been adapted to support the people living there and is situated in a residential area of Fareham. The home is registered to accommodate three adults with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection there were two people living at the home.

The home had a registered manager in place and our records showed she had been formally registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) since July 2015. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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. We were supported by the registered manager throughout the inspection.

Staff were aware of safeguarding issues, had undertaken training in the area and told us they would report any concerns around potential abuse. The provider was following appropriate safeguarding processes and reported concerns to the local safeguarding adults team.

Staff supported people on a one-to-one basis and were able to accompany people to access the community and support them with their personal care needs. Proper recruitment procedures and checks were in place to ensure staff employed by the service had the correct skills and experience. Medicines were stored and handled correctly and safely.

Staff had access to regular training and updating of skills. Records indicated most staff had completed a range of training and systems were in place to monitor it remained up to date. Staff told us, and records confirmed there were regular supervision sessions for all staff members and annual appraisals.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) including the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. MCA is a law that protects and supports people who do not have ability to make their own decisions and to ensure decisions are made in their ‘best interests’ it also ensures unlawful restrictions are not placed on people in care homes and hospitals. Applications for consideration of DoLS had been made by the registered manager. Best interests decisions had been made where people did not have capacity to make their own decisions, although we noted the local authority were not always proactively involved. We have made a recommendation about this.

People had access to health care services to help maintain their wellbeing. There were regular visits to general practitioners and other health and social care professionals. Advice from such interventions was incorporated into people’s care records.

People were supported to access adequate levels of food and drink. Specialist advice had been sought, where necessary, and guidance followed. People’s weights were monitored.

We observed there to be good relationships between people and staff. People looked happy and relaxed in staff company. Relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. Staff understood about treating people with dignity and respected people’s personal space and choices. One person was being supported by an independent advocate.

People’s needs had been assessed and individualised care plans and risk assessments developed that addressed all their identified needs. Care plans had detailed information for both care staff and visiting professionals to follow. Changes to care delivery were reviewed, although this was not always appropriately recorded. People were supported to attend various events and activities in the local community. The manager told us there had been no formal complaints in the last year and relatives told us they had not raised any concerns.

Regular checks and audits were carried out on the service by the registered manager and these actions were overseen by the regional manager. Staff were positive about the leadership of the service and the support they received from the registered manager. They said there was a good staff team and felt well supported by colleagues. Questionnaires completed by relatives were positive about the care provided. Daily records at the home were up to date and contained good detail.

There were policies and procedures in place for staff to use. This assisted them to provide care and support to people in line with their needs and wishes.

We found that people were appropriately supported to make choices in their lives and their views and wishes about their care and treatment were sought. We observed that people's privacy and dignity was respected most of the time.

We observed that staff communicated effectively with people using the service and supported them in ways that promoted their independence. Support provided was individual to people's needs. Risks associated with the individual's care and support were assessed and managed well, taking into account people's safety and their right to make choices. One relative told us 'staff are marvellous . . . they communicate very well'.

The service had systems in place to ensure people were protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse and their rights were respected and upheld. Staff had an understanding of safeguarding issues and how to report abuse or allegations of abuse. Two relatives told us that they felt people were safe.

The provider had policies and procedures in place for supporting staff and induction training was provided. We found that supervisions were completed regularly and in line with the policy and included six monthly appraisals. One member of staff told us that they 'Feel supported and the registered manager is wonderful'. One relative said 'I cannot speak highly enough of the staff, they give me real peace of mind'.

We found that there were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service that people received.

We observed that staff communicated effectively with people using the service and supported them in ways that promoted their independence. Support provided was individual to people's needs. Health issues and any risks associated with the individual's care and support were assessed and managed well, taking into account people's safety and their right to make choices.

The service had systems in place to ensure people were protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse and their rights were respected and upheld. Staff had an understanding of safeguarding issues and how to report abuse or allegations of abuse. Relatives told us that they felt the people were safe.

We observed people were supported by adequate flexible numbers of staff, all of whom received ongoing training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to meet people's needs. A relative told us that staff 'seemed very well trained and a special group of people.'

We saw that there were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service that people received and to continually make improvements. A relative that told us they had seen 'nothing but ongoing improvements every year.'