Huguenot Place

Updated 20 November 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.’

We inspected Huguenot Place on 12 September and 11 October 2018. The inspection was unannounced on the first day and announced on the second day and carried out by one inspector. A British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter joined us on the first day of inspection and we spoke with three people who lived in the home to seek their views about the care they received.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service including the last inspection report. During the inspection we checked two people’s care records, four staff files and records relating to the management of the home. We also spoke with three support workers, the deputy manager and the registered manager.

Updated 20 November 2018

Huguenot Place is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to five people who are deaf with mental health needs. One person was staying in hospital at the time of this inspection.

A registered manager was in post who was present on both days of the inspection. 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.

The registered manager was also responsible for managing Harding House located nearby which is another CQC registered care home which we inspected at the same time as Huguenot Place. Staff working at each service attended joint staff meetings and accessed the same organisational systems in place across areas such as training, care planning and quality assurance.

We inspected Huguenot Place on 12 September and 11 October 2018. The inspection was unannounced on the first day and we told the provider we would be returning on the second day.

At our last inspection in May 2017, we rated the service Good overall. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated any serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Appropriate numbers of support staff were allocated to help keep people safe. People spoken with were happy with the support provided by the staff working at Huguenot Place and said they were treated with dignity and respect.

We saw staff members had been safely recruited and had access to both mandatory and specialist training. Staff also received regular one to one supervision and additional support as required.

Staff understood how to help protect people from the risk of abuse. The service had procedures in place to report any safeguarding concerns to the local authority. People and staff were protected from potential risk of harm as the service had identified and assessed any risks to them and reviewed these on a regular basis. People had assessments which were individual to the person and their strengths and needs.

Medicines were administered in a safe way. Staff received training and a competency framework was in place to make sure they understood and followed safe procedures for administering medicines.

Staff had received training in the MCA (Mental Capacity Act) and understood the importance of gaining people’s consent before assisting them.

The service completed a detailed personalised support plan for each person with information provided in accessible formats. They kept people’s needs under review and made changes as required.

People using the service felt able to raise any concerns or complaints. There was a procedure in place for people to follow if they wanted to raise any issues. Staff also said they felt comfortable in raising any concerns should they have any.

The registered manager monitored the quality of the service and made changes to improve the service provided when required. Staff and people who used the service found the management team to be approachable.