We carried out a review of the data available to us about Marion House 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 Marion House, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
A regular programme of testing for COVID-19 was in place for staff and people who lived in the service. There had been a good uptake of residents receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. The service had plans in place and knew how to respond to an outbreak of infection to ensure the safety of people and staff.
Effective systems were in place to ensure staff and visitors to the service followed government guidelines for wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Facilities were available for visitors to sanitise their hands and put on PPE. Screening questions and a temperature check were standard requirements for all visitors. The external sensory room had been adapted to accommodate visits, in line with current guidance.
The service was clean, staff carried out daily and two hourly additional tasks, such as cleaning of any regular touchpoint surfaces. Regular infection control audits took place and actions had been followed up when required.
The registered manager reported good support from the local health professionals including the local GP practice throughout the pandemic
About the service:
Marion House is a care home, which provides accommodation and personal care to people with autistic spectrum conditions, who may have behaviours that challenge and associated complex needs. The home was registered for five people. At the time of our inspection, two people were using the service. The people we met, had complex needs and were not able to share their views with us verbally. We therefore observed how care was delivered and discussed this with staff, relatives and professionals to help inform our judgements.
The accommodation was over three floors. The ground floor had one bedroom and communal areas, including a lounge, dining room and conservatory. On the first floor, there were further bedrooms and on the second floor a self-contained apartment. Outside there was a large, secure garden area and an interactive sensory activities room.
People’s experience of using this service:
There was a friendly, homely and welcoming atmosphere for people using the service.
People received safe care from staff who knew them well. Potential risks to people’s health, safety and well-being had been assessed to help keep people safe. There were suitable arrangements for the safe storage, management and disposal of medicines and people were supported to take their medicines by trained staff. There were systems in place to help promote infection control and lessons were learned when things went wrong.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways. 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 had a say in how the service was run by accessing regular meetings, where tailored support was offered to maximise input from people using the service. Information was in a range of formats including visual and audio communication devices to support people’s voices to be heard. People’s views were considered and had been used to make changes to activities, the environment and the menu.
People’s diverse needs had been assessed and care was personalised to meet their desired outcomes. A range of activities were on offer which reflected people’s interests. People had regular staff giving care and positive relationships had been developed. People enjoyed the attention and interaction with staff members. Staff respected and promoted people’s dignity and made sure they supported them in the way they wished, whilst encouraging them to be as independent as possible. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and staff recruitment practices were satisfactory.
The service was managed in a responsive way to support people’s changing needs. The registered manager was visible and accessible. There was a management structure in place which gave clear lines of responsibility and accountability. A range of checks were in place to raise standards and drive improvements within the home. This is one of a number of locations the provider operated nationally and systems had been developed and shared across their locations to support learning and quality improvements.
Partnerships had been developed with the community and health and social care professionals. When people had been unwell, staff had raised the concern and involved health professionals to address their health care needs.
When required, notifications had been completed to inform us of events and incidents, this helped us to monitor any actions the service had taken. Good governance processes were in place, alongside comprehensive auditing checks, including management of any complaints, to ensure quality care was delivered.
Further details and information can be found in the full report.
Rating at the last inspection: This was the first inspection for Marion House since their registration with Care Quality Commission in April 2018.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned full comprehensive inspection to ensure the service was meeting the regulations of the Health and Social Care Act and CQC. We found the service to be Good.
Follow up:
We will continue with ongoing monitoring as per our re-inspection programme and if any concerning information received, we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk