We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Views on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about The Views, you can give feedback on this service.
The Views is a residential care home providing personal care for up to six people with learning disabilities. Some people had physical disabilities and were wheelchair users. At the time of inspection, five people were living at the service.
The Views is a six bedded bungalow, with all area’s wheelchair accessible for people. This included a large garden which people enjoyed in the warmer weather. People had their own large, personalised bedrooms and shared two bathrooms, with specialised bathing and shower facilities.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
Staff went the extra mile to ensure that people had their own voice and were as involved as possible in their care and support. They were passionate about providing people with the tools they needed and preferred, to communicate. This included specialised technology and the use of social media. Activities were solely focused on people, their preferences and goals and had an extremely positive impact on their wellbeing. Relatives and staff told us how staff had gone above and beyond to ensure people’s preferences and wishes were met at the end of their lives.
People remained safe with support from staff who knew them, their support needs and risks to their wellbeing. We observed that staff constantly looked out for areas of risk and took immediate action to mitigate them. There were always enough staff to meet people’s needs and they were recruited safely.
Some people had complex medicines protocols, but these were well known by staff and medicines were given safely. The building was kept safe through a number of health and safety checks by staff and external professionals. A professional said, “The home is always clean and tidy and staff members respect that it is the resident’s 'home'.” When incidents occurred, actions were taken immediately to reduce reoccurrence.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff continuously asked people about their views and choices and these were documented.
Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs and preferences. They had received specialised training, regular supervision and team meetings to ensure they were confident in their roles. People’s nutritional and hydrational needs continued to be met. They were supported with regular involvement from health and social care professionals, who spoke positively about the support people received.
There was a kind and caring culture at the Views. Relatives and professionals spoke highly about staff. We observed that people enjoyed spending time with staff and that strong relationships had been built. Staff were passionate about working with people. One staff member said, “Having worked in this field a while, I feel for the first time I am at home. It makes me so very enthusiastic about everything.”
People’s privacy, dignity and independence was promoted and respected. People’s views were continually sought, using a variety of tools to create a sensory experience and further understanding of choices about their care.
Relatives and professionals were complimentary about the registered manager and how the service was run. Staff described them as, “Lovely”, “Very supportive” and said, “Even if she’s not here, we can always phone her.” Staff told us they felt part of a warm, supportive, team-working culture, that centred around people’s quality of life every day. One staff member said, “I loved the culture from the moment I came here.”
Quality assurance processes were robust to give oversight of the service. The registered manager and team leader had ideas of how to continuously improve people’s lives and valued working in partnership with others to achieve this.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 8 August 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of the service on 30 June 2017. At this inspection, we found that the service had maintained its 'Good' rating.
At the last inspection of 28 October and 6 November 2014, we found that the systems in place to monitor the quality of care and to gather relatives and health and care professionals’ views about the service were not effective.
At our inspection of 30 June 2017, we found that appropriate arrangements were in place to check the quality and safety of the service. Systems to gather relatives and health and social care professionals’ views about the service were effective.
The registered manager and provider carried out regular checks and audits on the quality and safety of the service. The service worked in close partnership with other agencies to deliver people’s care and support in line with current practice and legislation.
People received safe care at the service. Staff knew how to protect people from abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns. Staff identified risks to people’s health and well-being and had sufficient information about how to support them safely. People took their prescribed medicines safely. Enough numbers of staff deployed at the service met people’s needs in a safe manner.
People had their care delivered by trained staff with the necessary skills required to undertake their role effectively. Staff received support in their role and attended training and supervisions to improve on their work practice.
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.
Staff understood and applied the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards when they delivered people’s care.
Healthy meals and appropriate food provided at the service met people’s dietary needs and individual preferences. People had access to healthcare services when needed and staff supported them to maintain good health.
People’s care was respectful, kind and compassionate. Staff respected people’s privacy and promoted their right to confidentiality and to be treated with dignity.
Staff assessed people’s needs and developed support plans from the information gathered about how to provide care responsive to people’s needs. People received personalised care and support as planned. Staff sought and received people’s consent before they provided care.
People were supported to make a complaint and to raise any concerns about their care. Staff encouraged people to share their views about the service and acted on the feedback.
We inspected The Views on 28 October and 6 November 2014. This was an unannounced inspection.
The Views is a care home which provides personal care and support for people with physical and complex, profound learning disabilities. The home can accommodate up to six people. Four people were living at the home on the days of our inspection.
The home is one of a number of locations operated by Affinity Trust, who provide support nationally for people with learning disabilities. The property is owned and maintained by the local council. It is a purpose built bungalow offering level access for wheelchair users as well as wide corridors and doorways.
A registered manager was in post but was not present during the inspection. A new manager had been appointed, they were undergoing registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). During this time, the appointed manager (the manager) maintained oversight of the day to day running of The Views and was supported by the registered manager. The registered manager was overseeing another home operated by Affinity Trust.
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.
Systems intended to gather the views of relatives and health and social care professionals had lapsed. We identified this as an area for improvement. However, we found that the home was a safe, well maintained environment, providing suitable accommodation, equipment and facilities for people.
A sufficient number of suitably qualified and experienced staff supported people. We observed staff speaking with people in a kind and respectful manner. Staff supported people patiently, with understanding and compassion. Staff understood and demonstrated the importance of respecting people’s choices, preferences, privacy and dignity. Staff were aware of the values of the service.
Care and support was individual and based on the assessed needs of each person. Care plans and risk assessments were comprehensive and reviewed regularly. This helped to ensure people’s needs were met and they were supported safely and consistently. People each had an allocated staff member as their facilitator, sometimes known as a key worker. This member of staff encouraged and supported them to be involved in the running of the home. This included planning meetings about every day events as well as involvement in staff recruitment and quality assurance assessments.
There were robust recruitment and selection procedures and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. Medication was effectively managed. Medicines were administered safely to people.
The manager and staff showed that they understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where people were unable to make complex decisions for themselves, the service had considered the person’s capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The appointed manager had applied for a DoLS authorisation for each of the four people at The Views. We saw documentation to support this, together with records of best interest meetings.
The last inspection of this service was on 5 October 2013, where no concerns were identified.
Care plans viewed demonstrated that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. We saw that people had been involved in planning care and support. When people's needs changed expert advice was sought immediately and the care plan updated to reflect the changes.
We looked at the entire building in relation to its suitability and safety. The home was well designed and adapted to provide a safe and comfortable place for people to live and receive the support they required. There was also a well maintained level accessible garden for people to enjoy. Individual rooms were well decorated, comfortable and homely. Training records showed that all staff were suitably trained and supported in their role.
People were made aware of the complaints system. This was provided in a format that met their needs. Staff told us that would support people to raise any complaint.
In our discussions with staff they demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the people living at the service. This was confirmed by our observations and checking records.
Care records showed that people's likes had been considered and were encouraged to make decisions about their lives as far as possible. We saw that people had been involved in planning care and support. When people's needs changed we found that records had been updated quickly and effectively to reflect this.
Staff spoken with demonstrated good understanding of how to safeguard people from harm and what steps they needed to take if they were concerned about anything within the home. Training records showed that staff received regular training to update their knowledge on abuse and safeguarding. Training records also showed that all staff were suitably trained and supported in their role.
Records showed the provider regularly assessed and monitored the quality of the service. We saw that people and their representatives were asked their views about the home in meetings and annual surveys.