Background to this inspection
Updated
28 October 2016
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 visited the service on the 16 September 2016. This was an unannounced inspection. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.
During the inspection we spent time with people who lived at the service. We spent time in both houses that make up the location. We spent time in the lounge, kitchen and people’s own rooms when we were invited to do so. We took time to observe how people and staff interacted. People were unable to use structured language to communicate verbally with us, so we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.
We spoke with those that knew people well, we spoke with three relatives of people. We gained the views of staff and spoke with the registered manager and four support workers.
Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. We considered information which had been shared with us by the local authority and looked at the record of notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. A Provider Information Return (PIR) was submitted prior to the inspection. A PIR asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make.
During the inspection we reviewed the records of the service. These included staff training records and procedures, audits and three staff files along with information about the upkeep of the premises. We looked at two support plans and risk assessments along with other relevant documentation to support our findings.
Updated
28 October 2016
The inspection took place on 16 September 2016 and was unannounced.
Southdown Housing Association - 39-41 Whitehawk Way provides accommodation and personal care for six people with a learning disability and complex needs. People were aged from 42 to 70 years and required support with personal care, mobility, health and communication needs. Accommodation was arranged across two bungalows at the location. The service was adapted to meet the needs of people living there. Each person had their own adapted bedroom. The service is one of six residential care homes run by Southdown Housing Association Limited, a not-for-profit specialist provider of care, support and housing services in Sussex.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 home is run.
We found one area of practice that required improvement. The registered manager had not informed CQC of an incident that led to police being contacted. This is part of the registered person's responsibilities. By not being informed of these incidents, CQC were potentially unable to ensure that the appropriate actions had been taken to ensure that people were safe.
People, their relatives and healthcare professionals were positive about the quality of care and support provided to people at the service. One relative told us, “The staff are good at their jobs and the care has been second to none. It’s been difficult for them [staff] as [my relative’s] needs change.” Another relative said, “Whitehawk Way is the perfect set up for [named person].” People’s keyworkers worked to identify goals and achieve greater independence. The registered manager involved people, relatives and healthcare professionals to ensure people received the support they required. One health and social care professional gave the following feedback, “There is a very pleasant atmosphere, helpful staff and extremely informative conversations with the manager.”
Staff had detailed knowledge of people’s needs and had the skills to provide support effectively. The registered manager carried out regular supervision sessions and appraisals. Staff felt well supported and understood their roles and responsibilities to ensure a quality service was given. Staff understood how to manage risks to people’s health and welfare and supported them to develop and reach their full potential. Staff had guidance on how to increase choice and control, reduce restrictive practice and improve quality of life.
The provider and registered manager actively sought people and their relative’s views and listened and acted on their ideas. People and staff celebrated achievements and milestones, including birthdays and cultural calendar events. A relative of a person said, “We are fortunate to have this lovely place for [named relative]. For their last birthday they threw a party. The whole party was geared around them. It was lovely to see.”
Staff supported people with the values of dignity and respect. Support plans contained documented assessments of people’s individual needs and the support they required. People continued to take part in activities they enjoyed and were encouraged to try new experiences based on their individual interests and abilities. There were sufficient numbers of skilled staff to meet people's needs and support activities. A relative said, “Staffing doesn’t appear to be a problem. [My relative] is able to get out and recently went up the new I360 tower in Brighton. The staff took photos from the top. Similarly, when they went away for a little break. Staff showed me photo’s they took and [my relative] is always happy and smiling.”
Staff understood how to protect people from possible harm. Risk assessments were completed to identify environmental risk as well as some risks that were specific to people's complex healthcare needs. Staff ensured people accessed healthcare services for advice, treatment and support. A health care professional provided the following feedback, ‘There is a very pleasant atmosphere, helpful staff and extremely informative conversations with the manager.’
People’s relatives and healthcare professionals said the registered manager promoted a person centred approach to care and support. They were complimentary about the registered manager who they said demonstrated strong leadership and provided a hands-on approach to the support people received. One person said, “[The registered manager] is very good. She is always there if I need to speak with her. They get the best out of staff.”
The provider and registered manager effectively used the audit systems in place to continually monitor the quality of the service and had action plans in place to further improve the support people received and management functions of the service. The registered manager monitored incidents and accidents and put plans in place to prevent recurrence. The provider used a recruitment procedure that ensured people received support from staff vetted as suitable to work with vulnerable people.