Archived: Outlook Care- The Bungalow

Updated 25 March 2021

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.

As part of CQC's response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 16 March 2021 and was announced.

Updated 25 March 2021

Outlook Care - The Bungalow is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual arrangement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Outlook Care - The Bungalow accommodates six adults with learning disabilities or autism in one building on one level. 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 life as any citizen.

The inspection took place on 2 and 6 August 2018 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection since the service was registered under the provider Outlook Care in August 2017.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures. The provider carried out safe recruitment checks before new staff began employment. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Building checks were carried out to ensure the safety of the premises in line with building requirements. Risk assessments were carried out to mitigate the risks of harm people may face at home and in the community. People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection. The provider analysed accidents and incidents and used this as a learning tool to make improvements to the service.

People’s care needs were assessed before they began to use the service to ensure the provider could meet their needs. Staff were supported with training opportunities, supervisions and appraisals. People were supported to eat a nutritionally balanced diet and to maintain their health. Important information such as changes in people’s care needs was communicated during staff handover. The provider and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the need to obtain consent before delivering care.

Relatives told us staff were caring. Staff described how they developed caring relationships with people. Relatives were kept updated on the wellbeing of their family member. People had a named care worker who had overall responsibility for their care. Staff were knowledgeable about equality and diversity. People were supported to maintain their independence and their privacy and dignity was promoted.

Staff understood how to deliver personalised care. Care plans were personalised and contained people’s preferences. People were offered a variety of activities in accordance with their preferences and each person had an individualised activity programme. The service was meeting people’s accessible communication needs. The service had a complaints procedure and kept a record of compliments.

Relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the management of the service. The provider had a system to obtain feedback about the service in order to make improvements. People had regular meetings so their preferences could be heard. Staff had regular meetings to keep updated on service development and to contribute their views on the running of the service. The provider had several quality audit systems to identify issues to improve the service delivered. The registered manager worked in partnership with outside agencies to share examples of good practice.