Archived: Unicorn House

Unicorn House is a residential care home that offers accommodation and personal care and support for up to twelve adults with learning disabilities and associated mental health issues.

At the time of our inspection the home 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection on 10 August 2015 the home met all the key questions and was rated good in each with an overall good rating.

Unicorn House was warm and welcoming with people freely coming and going as they pleased. Some people had limited speech and therefore relatives spoke on their behalf. We also based our findings on the observation of staff care practices and people's responses to them. People said and their body language demonstrated that they enjoyed how staff provided care and support for them and that they liked living at the home. During our visit people were engaged in a variety of activities at home and in the community. Staff supported them to choose their activities themselves, when they wished to do them and with whom. They were safe in the home and the local community. There was positive interaction between people and also with staff.

People were given information about any planned activities so that they could decide if they wanted to join in. Staff provided care and support in a friendly, professional and supportive way that was focussed on people as individuals. Staff said they knew people and their likes and dislikes well and this enabled them to provide the care and support that people needed. Staff were well trained, had appropriate skills and made themselves accessible to people. They said that they really enjoyed working at the home and received good training and support from the registered manager.

The home’s records were accessible, kept up to date and covered all relevant aspects of the care and support that people received. This included the choices people made, activities they attended and way their safety was protected. People’s care plans were completed and the information contained was regularly reviewed. This meant staff were able to perform their duties competently and efficiently. People were encouraged and supported by staff to address their health needs and had access to GP’s and other community based health professionals. People were supported to be healthy by choosing nutritious, balanced meals that promoted a healthy diet whilst taking into account their likes, dislikes and preferences. The body language of people with communication difficulties and their smiles showed that they liked the choice and quality of their meals.

Relatives said the registered manager and staff were very approachable, responsive to requests made or concerns raised and frequently encouraged feedback and acted upon it. The registered manager consistently monitored and assessed the quality of the service and encouraged staff to put forward ideas that may improve the quality of peoples’ lives.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible with the policies and systems at the home supporting this practice.

The health care professionals that responded to our questions were happy with the support that the home provided for people.

People who we did speak with were generally positive about their experiences of living at the home and the support they received from members of staff. One person told us 'I really like living here. I have my own keys and can come and go when I please'. We also gained verification of people's experiences of the service by speaking to representatives of people who use the service and the deputy manager as well as other members of staff who worked in the home.

We observed that people's experiences of the service were positive. During our inspection we saw the deputy manager and other members of staff treat people in a dignified manner and spoke to people in a respectful way and listened to what they had to say.

We saw the service had adopted various ways to ensure that people who use the service were supported fully and people's needs were being met. Frequent residents meetings were held and provided opportunities for people who use the service to meet collectively and discuss any issues or concerns.

People's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered and there were effective systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. We saw people using the service had been fully involved in developing their care plans and had been able to state their preferences and choices about how they lived their lives.

Throughout our visit we saw staff always treated the people who use the service with the utmost respect and courtesy. We also saw staff actively supported people to make informed decisions about how they lived their daily lives.

We found people received effective and safe care from suitably trained and experienced staff who were familiar with individual's needs and preferences. The provider also had effective systems in place to routinely assess and monitor the quality of the care and support that people received.