Archived: William Morris House

We found the following examples of good practice

¿ The service was clean and free of malodour. There was a cleaning schedule in place to ensure that all areas of the service were cleaned.

¿ The service had implemented personal protective equipment (PPE) stations which were situated near the main entrance and throughout the home.

¿ Visitors were supported by staff to ensure they followed safe infection control, PPE guidance and to check whether they had any symptoms of coronavirus before entering the home. This included taking the visitor's temperature.

¿ People were supported to receive regular testing for Covid-19. Where people went home or left the service for any period of time, the service had procedures in place to test people before they returned to the service.

¿ Staff were compliant with weekly testing requirements and the registered manager ensured test results were followed up when not received. When unclear results had been received, the registered manager and provider sought and followed advice from PHE.

¿ Individual risk assessments had been conducted on staff which identified any vulnerabilities they may have in relation to coronavirus and any mitigating action that the provider needed to implement.

¿ The service had appropriate infection control policies and procedures in place. These had been developed in line with current government guidance. There was signage around the service for staff and visitors on what measures were being taken to minimise the risk of spread of infection. These messages were also being communicated through easy read formats, email and on the provider's website.

William Morris House is a specialist residential college. The service is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 35 young people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. People attended the service either during term time, or a full time 52 week placement.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates and inspects accommodation and personal care. The educational provision at the college is regulated and inspected by the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED).

The service was on a large campus with two houses providing accommodation, these were bigger than most domestic style properties. Twelve people were using the service at the time of this inspection. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the service applied the principles of Registering the right support and other best practice guidance. The service supported people to transition from a residential college environment towards longer term accommodation and where possible, independent living.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People received care from staff who were recruited and trained safely. Medicines were managed safely. The service had appropriate safeguarding processes in place and people and staff knew how to raise safeguarding concerns if required.

People were supported to access community health care when required, the service worked effectively with other professionals to ensure people’s health needs were met.

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.

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.

People were cared for by staff who were kind and compassionate and knew them well.

People received a person-centred service. Care and support was tailored to individual needs and preferences. People were supported to be fully involved in their care planning, daily routines and long-term goals.

The service was well led. People and staff felt supported by the management team. The registered manager was knowledgeable about legislation and best practice guidance.

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 23 May 2017). Since this rating was awarded, the registered provider of the service has changed. We have used the previous rating to inform our planning and decisions about the rating at this inspection.

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.