The inspection took place on 7 July 2015. We announced the inspection as it was a small respite service and we wanted to be sure people would be available to talk to us.
The service opened in April 2014 and this was the first inspection.
Tawny Lodge provides planned short breaks for people with learning and physical disabilities, sensory impairment and autism. It also provides emergency stays for people. The service can accommodate up to four people at a time. The service is run by North Yorkshire County Council. The building has been completely re developed and opened in April 2014. The service is on two floors. Downstairs there is a communal open plan lounge, kitchen and dining area, and an outside paved patio area. There is also a toilet and laundry room. There are two lifts which are safe to use in a fire. Upstairs there are four large bedrooms, each is en suite and there is a large communal bathroom. There is also another lounge and a quiet room. The manager’s office is on this level.
The service 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At this inspection we found the service was in breach of the regulation relating to consent. They were not applying the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. You can see what action we have told the provider to take at the back of this report.
People and their carers told us they felt safe when they stayed at the service. Staff had access to a safeguarding policy; they had received robust training and had a good understanding of how to safeguard people.
Individual risk assessments and risk management plans were in place and contained detailed guidance for staff about how to reduce the risk of avoidable harm. Medicines were managed safely.
There were sufficient staff to meet the needs of the people who used the service. We were told people’s support needs and friendships were taken into account when planning their stays. As well as this the registered manager told us they tried to match people with staff they had common interests with.
The service had effective recruitment and selection processes in place. They considered the current staff skill mix and experience when recruiting new members of the team.
Staff had access to a variety of training courses to enable them to have the skills to provide support to people with complex care needs. They had regular supervision and were given the opportunity to reflect on their practice and identify any on going development needs.
People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. We saw people had detailed support plans in place regarding this. The service supported people to be as independent as they could be, and to make their own choices regarding meal times.
The service had good links with healthcare professionals, who provided support in the service and guidance for staff. In addition each person had a hospital VIP passport which provided hospital staff with essential information about how to support the person and also how to recognise signs of them being unwell.
The environment was designed and decorated in line with the needs of the people who used the service. It was spacious and had up to date equipment to support people.
The service was caring. People who used the service and support workers had a good rapport and support staff knew people well. Carers told us they were confident their loved ones were well looked after and that they enjoyed visiting the service.
Support staff were enthusiastic and committed to providing person centred support, which they did. They ensured people’s dignity and privacy was respected. Support plans were person centred and focused on people’s preferences. People took part in a variety of activities.
The service was organised and worked at the person’s pace to support them to feel comfortable with support staff and in the environment.
Feedback from people and their carers was valued and encouraged. Information about how to make a complaint was accessible in a variety of formats for people.
There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. The registered manager was clear about their role and responsibilities, and was committed to continually improving the service. One example was work with the National Autistic Society to develop their skills in providing support for people with autism.
Staff meetings took place regularly and people were kept informed about the service via a regular newsletter.