Archived: High Street

Updated 28 February 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 was planned to check 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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 04 January 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an inspection manager.

Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We contacted the local authority, we checked the information we held about this service and the service provider. No concerns had been raised.

During our inspection we observed how staff interacted with people who used the service. We observed lunch, general observations and activities.

Most of the people who used the service were not able to verbalise with the inspectors, however, they responded by smiling, positive body language and using their recognised communication method.

We spoke with six people who used the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, one senior support worker and one support worker.

We reviewed two people’s care records, two medication records, two staff files and records relating to the management of the service, such as quality audits.

Updated 28 February 2018

High Street is a care home providing personal care and accommodation for six people with a learning disability. It is an extended and adapted bungalow with accessible gardens. At the time if the inspection six people were using the service.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People using the service felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and they felt confident in how to report these types of concerns.

People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be in a safe manner. Staff knew how to manage risks to promote people’s safety, and balanced these against people’s rights to take risks and remain independent.

There were sufficient staff with the correct skill mix on duty to support people with their needs. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service. Staff were not offered employment until satisfactory checks had been completed.

Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. Effective infection control measures were in place to protect people.

Any accidents/incidents or errors had been used as a learning opportunity.

People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people. Staff gained consent before supporting people.

Staff received an induction process and on-going training. They had attended a variety of training to ensure that they were able to provide care based on current practice when supporting people. They were also supported with regular supervisions.

People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required to enable people to access a balanced diet. There was access to drinks and snacks throughout the day.

People were supported to access a variety of health professionals when required, including opticians and doctors to make sure that they received additional healthcare to meet their needs.

The building had been adapted to meet the needs of the people who lived there.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times. Care plans were written in a person centred way and were responsive to people’s needs. People were supported to follow their interests and join in activities.

People knew how to complain. There was a complaints procedure in place and accessible to all. Complaints had been responded to appropriately.

Quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

People are 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 support this practice.

Further information is in the detailed findings below