Archived: Osborne House

Osborne House is a ‘supported living’ service providing personal care to adults with a learning disability. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection there were nine people using the service and four people received personal care.

We found the following examples of good practice:

• Visitors received health screening prior to entering the setting and were provided with information about how to follow infection prevention control procedures. We received feedback from social care professionals involved in people’s care confirming they were able to visit people in a safe and effective manner.

• People were supported to maintain contact with their relatives whilst ensuring the safety of other people living at the service. People were supported to access the community in a safe manner. This enabled people to maintain social contact and structure, which was important to people’s wellbeing.

• The service supported people to follow social distancing, isolating and hygiene practices as much as possible. The environment had been adapted and tenants agreed to minimise contact in the communal kitchen and dining room by using a rota system for preparing and clearing away after meals.

• Staff supported people to engage with the COVID-19 vaccination programme. Efforts were made by the service to help people to understand vaccination. A nurse was invited to the service to provide information and explain the procedure.

Osborne House provides care to people living in a ‘supported living’ environment. Of the eight people living in the house three receive a regulated activity. The service supports people with a learning disability and associated needs. The Care Quality Commission only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) does not regulate premises used for supported living.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People were kept safe by staff and would be confident to raise any concerns they had. The provider’s recruitment procedures were robust and medicines were managed safely. There were sufficient staff to provide safe and effective care at the times agreed by the people who were using the service.

There were procedures in place to manage risks to people and staff. Staff were aware of how to deal with emergency situations and knew how to keep people safe by reporting concerns promptly through processes they understood well.

Staff received an induction and spent time working with experienced members of staff before working alone with people. Staff were supported to receive the training and development they needed to care for and support people’s individual needs.

Family members and external professionals who were involved in people’s care were complementary of the services provided, some describing the care and support as excellent. The comments we received demonstrated that people felt valued and listened to. People were treated with kindness and respect whilst their independence was promoted within the service and in the wider community.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Staff knew people very well and paid particular attention to finding out about their interests and personal preferences. This enabled support to be focused to achieve people’s desired outcomes. Individual support plans were person-centred and they considered the diverse needs of each person, taking into account any protected characteristics. The service provided flexible support embracing people’s individual wishes.

People knew how to raise concerns or make a complaint and they felt confident they would be listened to if concerns were raised. The service was working to the accessible information standard. Up to date information was communicated to staff as required to ensure they could provide the most appropriate care and support for each individual. Staff knew how to contact healthcare professionals in a timely manner if there were concerns about a person’s wellbeing.

The service was well-led, with strong leadership from the registered manager. Records were relevant, complete and reviewed regularly to reflect current information. The registered manager promoted an open, empowering, person centred culture. The values of the service were embedded in the way staff worked with people. Feedback was sought and used to monitor the quality of the service. Audits were conducted and used to make improvements.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Improvement actions were carried out to make sure people who use the service and staff who work there were in safe and accessible surroundings promoting their wellbeing. The provider had ensured the premises were adequately maintained and complied with legal requirements relating to the premises.

At the time of our inspection the provider did not have a registered manager in post. However, we were aware that the service manager was in the process of becoming a registered manager of the home.

We spoke to people about nutrition at Osborne House. One person told us, 'I feel I can choose things I like; I do my own shopping'. People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink.

People who use the service, staff and visitors were not protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises. Whilst maintenance tasks were completed, some risks identified by the home and others were not adequately addressed. There were risks from Legionella which were inadequately identified, assessed and managed.

We spoke with two people who told us they had no complaints about the service but if they had concerns, they would raise them with the care workers or the home manager. One person we spoke with told us, 'If I was worried, I would tell them'.

Records were kept securely and could be located promptly when needed. Records about people's care at the location were readily available. These included people's support plans, the daily records and other health related information.

At the time of our inspection the provider did not have a registered manager in post.

We observed the way that staff interacted and communicated with people who used the service and saw that people were treated with respect and dignity. We saw that people were supported to make choices to promote their independence.

We saw people involved in helping staff prepare their evening meal according to their abilities. We saw that people who used the service could choose what they wanted to eat as most people had a different meal on the day we visited. One person told us that staff help them with shopping but they choose their own food, "no point getting something you don't like."

We saw that people were involved in activities of their choosing like drama groups, going to the pictures, day trips and bowling. People we spoke to expressed their enjoyment of the activities they participated in and told us "I love it" when speaking about the gardening club they attended and "I like it, it's good" in relation to the drama group.

We found that people who used the service were involved in making decisions about their care through regular care plan

reviews and meetings to discuss what was important to them.

Staff we spoke to told us they felt well supported in their work both by their colleagues and their manager and told us they enjoyed working at the home. They told us how they would rather encourage and support people to do things for themselves where they were able.