- Care home
Dimensions Fountain House Innox Lane
Report from 23 February 2024 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 22 March to 24 April 2024. Dimensions Fountain House Innox Lane is registered to provide accommodation for up to eight people who require personal care. At the time of our assessment, there were eight people living at the service. The people who live at the service have learning disabilities and profound physical needs. The assessment was prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a person using the service required hospital admission. This incident was subject to further investigation by CQC as to whether any regulatory action should be taken. As a result, this assessment did not examine the circumstances of the incident. However, the information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of risk of unsafe medicines management. This assessment examined those risks. During our assessment, we found people were mostly supported safely. We found some concerns in relation to people’s care and support records, including medical records. We received positive feedback from staff and relatives about the management of the service, but found some audits were not always effective in identifying areas for improvement.
People's experience of this service
During our assessment we were unable to gain feedback from people living at the service. We therefore completed observations of care and sought feedback from people’s relatives. Observations showed people were mostly supported by kind and caring staff who knew people well. However, we observed some interactions which did not always promote people’s dignity and respect, and some staff did not always appear to understand people’s needs and preferences. Relatives we spoke with were happy with the care and support provided to their family member, and spoke positively about the service. Staff supported people's access to the local community. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People’s living space was adapted to help meet people’s sensory needs, for example there was a relaxation room with sensory equipment and people’s bedrooms were person-centred. Staff employed by the service knew people well, however, the provider had not fully ensured that all staff were able to communicate effectively. For example, at the time of our inspection there was one person who used some signs to communicate. We found that although longstanding staff got to know people and these signs well, there was no formal process for ensuring new staff and agency staff could understand the signs this person was using. Additionally, the service had not further explored alternative signs for this person to support effective communication. There was a positive culture within the service. We saw people were supported to achieve good outcomes, such as going on holiday on a cruise. Feedback from relatives and stakeholders about the service was positive.