225 London Road provides personal care and accommodation for up to six people in a small domestic care home setting. The home was presented as an ordinary detached house over two floors with access to the first floor via stairs. People had single rooms. Communal space consisted of a lounge area and dining room. There was a private garden at the rear of the property.225 London Road is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of inspection there were five people living in the home.
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.
The care service was provided in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
At our last inspection in June 2016 we rated the service Good. At this inspection, we found the service had remained Good.
The home was well decorated and adapted to meet people’s needs. The home had a homely feel and reflected the interests and lives of the people who lived there, with photos of people and staff on display.
None of the people who lived at the home were able to communicate using ordinary verbal conversation. However, most people could respond to direct questions with a “yes” or “no” answer and used other forms of communication such as basic sign language or sounds which the staff knew how to interpret.
People gave us positive feedback about the home and their satisfaction with care staff and did this through their interaction with staff and the ease with which they moved about the home and exercised choice throughout the inspection.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet the needs and preferences of the people that lived there. Staff understood their duty should they suspect abuse was taking place, including the agencies that needed to be notified, such as the local authority safeguarding team or the police.
Risks of harm to people had been identified and clear plans and guidelines were in place to minimise these risks, without restricting people’s freedom. Staff ensured that people were involved in decisions by speaking with people and making sure care plans were personalised and easy to read.
People were offered choices, supported to feel involved and staff knew how to communicate effectively with each individual according to their needs. People were relaxed and comfortable in the company of staff. Staff supported people in a way which was kind, caring, and respectful.
Staff told us they received the support and training they needed to help them do their jobs well. The managers were proactive in ensuring staff completed training relevant to the needs of people living at the service. This included specialist training to enable staff to care for people with particular needs.
Staff helped people to keep healthy and well, they supported people to attend appointments with GP’s and other healthcare professionals when they needed to. Medicines were stored safely and people received their medicines as prescribed, with accurate records available to show which medicines people had received. People were involved in their food and drink choices and meals were prepared taking account of people’s health, cultural and religious needs.
People were 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 supported this practice.
The provider regularly sought people’s and staff’s views about how the care and support they received could be improved. There were systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service that people experienced. Relatives told us they felt able to speak to the registered manager or any of the staff team at any time if they needed help and assistance.
The newly-appointed registered manager and an established staff team were committed to providing high quality person centred care and support. This ethos was central to how the service operated. The service was flexible and responsive to changes in people’s needs and individual family circumstances. The service had a stable and consistent staff team who had people’s wellbeing at heart.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.