Stonham Kingston House

Updated 15 September 2018

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 4 July 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection, as this was a small service and we wanted to ensure management and staff were available to speak with us.

The inspection was completed by two adult social care inspectors. We contacted the local authority safeguarding and commissioning teams for feedback prior to the inspection and used this to aid our planning.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We looked at information held about the provider and the service including statutory notifications relating to the service. Statutory notifications include information about important events, which the provider is required to send us. We used this information to help us plan this inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with three people who used the service, one relative, the registered manager, operations manager and three support workers. After the inspection site visit, we also spoke with one person who used the service, a relative, a senior staff member, two healthcare professionals and one other professional.

During the inspection, we looked at three care plans and the medication administration records of two people. We looked at the recruitment records of three staff, staff training records and minutes of meetings with people who used the service and staff. We looked at a selection of documentation that related to the running of the service; these included quality monitoring audits, policies and procedures, complaints and environment safety certificates. The registered manager had compiled a file with a variety of relevant evidence. This included surveys, feedback from professionals, samples of care plans and reviews and newsletters. We reviewed this as part of the inspection.

Updated 15 September 2018

Stonham Kingston House was inspected on 4 July 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as this was a small service and we wanted to ensure management and staff were available to speak with us.

Stonham Kingston House is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to a maximum of 6 people, who live in their own flats. It provides a service to people who may be living with a learning disability, mental health conditions or a drug or alcohol problem. Some people share their flats with another tenant. The property is split into three flats, a resource room, a bedroom for sleep in staff and an office. The flats comprised of two bedrooms and people shared a shower room, toilet, lounge/kitchen/dining area and hallway. At the time of the inspection, five people were receiving support.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

Stonham Kingston House was last inspected on 6 January 2016. The overall rating for the service was good. This inspection has found the service has improved it’s rating from good to outstanding.

There was a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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.

The caring and inclusive culture at the service was outstanding. Without exception, people spoke very highly of the staff; they developed honest and genuine caring relationships with people using the service. Staff recognised people as individuals and went the extra mile to welcome and include them in the service. Staff considered all aspects of people’s lives and not just the care and support they required. The service had a fantastic approach to equality, diversity and human rights whilst supporting people to identify and address discrimination.

People were supported to achieve their goals, through excellent person-centred care. Positive risk taking was encouraged throughout the service, balancing the potential benefits and risks of choosing particular actions over others; allowing people to reach their full potential through greater independence. Innovation and creativity was used in meeting people’s needs and staff used happiness as a preventative strategy to crisis. Strong community inclusion enabled people to live fulfilled and meaningful lives, through accessing a wide variety of local activities, education and volunteering opportunities.

The service was exceptionally well-led by a registered manager who led by example and had embedded an open and honest culture. Staff were committed to working at the service as the management team valued and invested in them. Quality assurance systems were robust and used regularly by the registered manager and the provider. They shared best practice and strove to continually improve the service. The provider created opportunities for people to monitor and inspect the service; developing the service in the way that mattered to the people who used it. Improvements were driven by engagement with people using the service and staff; their views were valued and drove positive changes within the service.

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 choices and decisions were respected. Staff sought consent and followed the Mental Capacity Act 2005 when people were unable to make an informed decision. People’s hydration and dietary needs were met by staff who had received relevant training. Staff had regular supervision, that was thorough and had appraisals completed. Information was available to people in their preferred format and in a way they could understand.

People’s safety was maintained as staff had good knowledge how to safeguard people. There was appropriate staffing levels and people were supported by staff who had required skills and knowledge. People had appropriate support, ensuring their care needs were met. Medicines were managed safely and the provider maintained a comfortable and safe environment. Recruitment processes were robust and included people who used the service. The service invested in staff development and promoted progression. Supervision and appraisals were used to maintain staff well-being and high standards of care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.