30 Richmond Road

Updated 19 February 2019

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 inspection took place on 22 January 2019 and was unannounced. The inspection was completed by one inspector.

During the inspection process the local authority care commissioners were contacted to obtain feedback from them in relation to the service. In addition, we sought feedback from health care professionals involved with the service. We referred to previous inspection reports, local authority reports and notifications. Notifications are sent to the Care Quality Commission by the provider to advise us of any significant events related to the service, this is a legal requirement. As part of the inspection process we also look at the 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 had received the PIR for 30 Richmond Road and used this to help inform our inspection plan. During the inspection we spoke with five members of staff, including, the registered manager, the deputy manager and three care staff.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) during lunch. SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We also observed interactions between staff and people living in the home throughout the day, both whilst giving support and during general interactions.

Care plans, health records and additional documentation relevant to their care and support were seen for three people. In addition, a sample of records relating to the management of the service, for example staff records, complaints, quality assurance assessments and audits were viewed. Staff recruitment and supervision records for four of the staff were looked at. As part of the inspection process we completed observations during the day, as well as seeking feedback from relatives during the inspection process.

Updated 19 February 2019

30 Richmond Road is residential care home for up to five people, who have a diagnosis of learning disabilities and / or are on the autistic spectrum. The service is registered to provide accommodation in addition to personal care with a condition that no nursing care is delivered to people. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The home offers five bedrooms with communal bathrooms, a dining room, communal lounge, sensory room and access to the kitchen. A spacious rear garden further offers additional space for people to use, including the development of vegetable beds. Floors are accessible by stairs.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated 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.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good

The service continues to keep people safe. Recruitment procedures continued to ensure suitable staff were employed to support people and help keep them safe. Risk assessments continued to consider least restrictive options to enable people to continue engaging in activities that enhanced their well-being. Care documents supported the risk assessments currently in place.

Medicine management continued to be provided in a safe way. Audits illustrated that people received their medicines in a timely manner and how they wished. Medicines were correctly stored, disposed of and ordered to ensure that people were not without their medicines at any point. Two recent pharmacy inspections rated the service highly, with no recommendations or improvements suggested. The service was commended on their medicine management.

Staff training was kept up to date, and a rolling training programme was in place. Staff received frequent supervisions and annual appraisals that enabled them to discuss their performance.

People's needs were assessed initially upon admission, and thereafter reviewed monthly to ensure care was the most appropriate. People were involved in their care planning process as far as possible, with relatives and professionals consulted where necessary and agreed. People’s rooms were personalised in a style that they preferred, with furnishings that brought a personal touch to their rooms.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible. This included making decisions about their care as far as possible, food choices as well as activities. People received responsive care. Staff had a thorough understanding of people’s needs and focused on developing people’s skills through personalised and responsive care. External relationships were encouraged, and developed. Staff encouraged and assisted on family holidays

Staff approach remained caring. People were supported by a staff team that knew them well, and ensured they enabled them to maintain their dignity at all times People communicated in their preferred way, with records clearly highlighting communication methods, including the use of body language and facial expressions.

The service continued to be well-led. There was a clear vision and direction from the senior management team that reflected on staff practice. Staff spoke positively of the registered manager, stating an open-door policy was practiced, which enabled staff to approach the management team and discuss any issues.

Good community links were created, and the service worked efficiently with visiting health professionals. The service continued to have good governance and reflective practice, ensuring compliance with the regulations.

Further information is in the detailed findings within the report.