Bidna House

Updated 22 February 2022

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at how services manage infection control and visiting arrangements. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

We received information of concern about infection prevention and control measures and staffing at this service. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider has in place. These concerns were not substantiated. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 25 January 2022 and was unannounced.

Updated 22 February 2022

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 15 December 2018.

Bidna House provides care and accommodation for up to 12 people. On the day of our inspection there were 12 people living at the service. The home provides residential care for people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

There was a registered manager in post who was also a joint owner. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 checked the service was working in line with ‘Registering the Right Support’, which makes sure services for people with a learning disability and/or autism receive services are developed in line with national policy - including the national plan, building the right support - and best practice. For example, how the service ensured care was personalised, how people’s discharge if needed, was managed and people’s independence and links with their community.

At the last inspection on the 11 May 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Why the service is rated Good:

Not all people were able to fully verbalise their views about their experience of living there. We spent time with people seeing how they spent their day and observing the interactions between people and the staff supporting them.

The provider told us in their provider information return (PIR) that, “We are responsive to the needs of the resident and then as they stay with us for longer, we review and adapt our care packages according to their need.”

People remained safe at the service. People were protected from abuse as staff knew what action they would take if they suspected anyone was being abused, mistreated or neglected. Staff were recruited safely and checks carried out with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) ensured they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. Staff confirmed there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and to help keep them safe.

People’s risks were assessed, monitored and managed by staff to help ensure they remained safe. Staff assessed and understood risks associated with people’s care and lifestyle. Risks were managed effectively to keep people safe whilst maintaining people’s rights and independence. People had their medicines managed safely, and received their medicines as prescribed. Staff completed training and competency checks were carried out to continually test their knowledge and to help ensure their skills in relation to medicines were up to date and in line with best practice.

People received support from staff who had completed training to meet their needs effectively. Staff meetings, one to one supervision of staff practice, and appraisals of performance were undertaken. Staff completed the Care Certificate (a nationally recognised training course for staff new to care). Staff confirmed the Care Certificate training looked at and discussed the equality, diversity, and human right needs of people.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People's health was monitored by the staff and they had access to a variety of healthcare professionals. The registered manager worked with external health and social care professionals to help ensure a coordinated approach to people’s care.

People’s care and support was based on legislation and best practice guidelines; helping to ensure the best outcomes for people. People’s legal rights were up held and consent to care was sought as much as possible. Care records were person centred and held full details on how people liked their needs to be met; considering people’s preferences and wishes. Overall, people’s individual equality and diversity preferences were known and respected. Information recorded included people’s previous medical and social history, and people’s cultural, religious and spiritual needs.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff who valued them. Staff had built strong relationships with people who lived there. Staff respected people’s privacy. People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support people received.

The service remained responsive to people's individual needs and provided personalised care and support. People’s communication needs were known by staff. Staff had received training in how to support people with different communication needs. The provider had taken account of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS is a requirement to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss are given information they can understand, and the communication support they need.

Staff adapted their communication methods dependent upon people’s needs, for example using simple questions. Information for people with cognitive difficulties and information about the service was available in an easy read version for those people who needed it.

People could make choices about their day to day lives. The provider had a complaints policy in place and it was available in an easy read version. Staff knew people well and used this to gauge how people were feeling.

The service continued to be well led. People lived in a service where the provider’s values and vision were embedded into the service, staff and culture. Staff told us the registered manager and provider were approachable and made themselves available. The provider had monitoring systems which enabled them to identify good practices and areas of improvement.

People lived in a service which had been designed and adapted to meet their needs. The service was monitored by the provider to help ensure its ongoing quality and safety. The provider’s governance framework, helped monitor the management and leadership of the service, as well as the ongoing quality and safety of the care people were receiving.

Further information is in the detailed findings below