Archived: College House

Updated 10 April 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 was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This service was previously inspected in December 2016. At that time we found there were areas that required improvement. This inspection was conducted over two days by one adult social care inspector.

Prior to the inspection we looked at information we had about the service. This information included the statutory notifications that the provider had sent to CQC. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

Before the inspection, we had asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they planned to make. We reviewed the information included in the PIR and used it to assist in our planning of the inspection.

During our visits we spoke with six people individually in addition to observing people in communal areas. We spent time with the registered manager, home manager, administration assistant, six care staff, the cook and domestic assistant. We also received written feedback from a social care professional who visited the service in an advisory capacity. We observed lunch and staff interaction with people whilst supporting. We looked at three people’s care records, together with other records relating to their care and the running of the service. This included staff employment records, policies and procedures, audits and quality assurance reports.

Updated 10 April 2018

This inspection took place on 31 January and 1 February 2018 and was unannounced. College House is registered to provide accommodation for up to 20 people. At the time of our visit there were 16 people living at the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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. There was also a home manager who was responsible for the daily running of the home.

At our last inspection in December 2016 we rated the service overall as Requires Improvement. At that inspection we found breaches of Regulations 12, 17 and 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Following that inspection we told the provider to send us an action plan detailing how they would ensure they met the requirements of those regulations. At this inspection we saw the provider had taken action as identified in their action plan and improvements had been made. As a result of this inspection the service has an overall rating of Good.

Why the service is rated Good

The registered manager and staff followed procedures which reduced the risk of people being harmed. Staff understood what constituted abuse and what action they should take if they suspected this had occurred. Staff had considered actual and potential risks to people, plans were in place about how to manage these, monitor and review them.

People were supported by the services recruitment policy and practices to help ensure that staff were suitable. The registered manager and staff were able to demonstrate there were sufficient numbers of staff with a combined skill mix on each shift.

Improvements had been made to ensure the safe management of medicines. People were protected from the risk of cross infection. This was because appropriate guidance had been followed. People were cared for in a clean, well maintained, homely environment.

Improvements in staff induction and consistency in training helped ensure staff had the knowledge and skills required to carry out their roles effectively. They were supported by the provider and the registered manager at all times. People received a varied nutritious diet and told us they enjoyed the meals they received.

People received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. Changes in people’s needs were quickly identified and their care amended to meet their changing needs. The service was flexible and responded very positively to people’s requests. People who used the service felt able to make requests and express their opinions and views.

People were helped to exercise choices and control over their lives wherever possible. Where people lacked capacity to make decisions Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 best interest decisions had been made. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were understood by staff and appropriately implemented to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected.

People benefitted from a service that was well led. An increase in the provider’s oversight meant that a significant number of improvements had been made to help ensure that people were safe and received quality care. The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of effective quality assurance systems. There were processes in place to monitor quality and understand the experiences of people who used the service.