Lynwood

Updated 6 March 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 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.

The inspection was undertaken by one inspector on 4 February 2018 and was unannounced.

Prior to the inspection we looked at other information we held about the service such as notifications and previous reports. 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. At our last inspection of the service in June 2016 we did not identify any concerns with the care provided to people.

During the inspection we spoke with three staff about all three people who lived at the service. We met two of the people living at Lynwood. We spoke with the two staff on duty and one senior staff member. Following the inspection we spoke with the registered manager by telephone. The people living at the service had complex needs that limited their ability to communicate and tell us about their experience of being supported by the staff team. Therefore we observed how staff interacted and looked after people and we looked around the premises.

We looked at records relating to two individual’s care and the running of the home. These included care and support plans and records relating to medication administration. We also looked at quality monitoring of the service, survey feedback and the provider’s newsletter. We followed the office visit up by contacting six parents, 11 professionals and speaking with the registered manager by telephone to discuss the support people received at Lynwood.

Updated 6 March 2018

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 4 February 2018.

Lynwood provides care and accommodation for up to three people with learning disabilities. On the days of our inspection there were three people living at the care home. In relation to Registering the Right Support we found this service was doing all the right things, ensuring choice and maximum control. Registering the Right Support (RRS) sets out CQC’s policy registration, variations to registration and inspecting services supporting people with a learning disability and/or autism.

Lynwood 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.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 the last inspection on the 30 June 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated good:

We met and observed the care given to two people who lived at Lynwood during the inspection; one person was away during the inspection. People were not able to easily verbalise their views and staff used other methods of communication. For example play, Makaton (similar to sign language), visual choices and observation of facial expressions and bodily movements to communicate with people and support them to express their needs.

People remained safe at the service. People were protected by safe recruitment procedures to help ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Staff confirmed there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and support them with activities and trips out.

People’s risks were assessed, monitored and managed by staff to help ensure they remained safe. Risk assessments were completed to enable people to retain as much independence as possible. People received their medicines safely by suitably trained staff.

People continued to receive care from staff who had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. Staff had completed safeguarding training and the Care Certificate (a nationally recognised training course for staff new to care). Staff confirmed the Care Certificate training looked at and discussed the Equality and Diversity.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies, systems and values in the service supported this practice. People's healthcare needs were met and their health was monitored by the staff team. People had access to a variety of healthcare professionals.

People’s care and support was based on legislation and best practice guidelines, helping to ensure the best outcomes for people. People’s legal rights were up held and consent to care was sought. Care plans were person centred and held comprehensive details on how people liked their needs were to be met, taking into account people’s preferences and wishes. Information recorded included people’s previous medical past, social history and people’s cultural, religious and spiritual needs.

People were observed to be treated with kindness and compassion by the staff who valued them. The staff, many who had worked at the service for some time, had built strong relationships with people. Staff respected people’s privacy. People or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support people received.

The service remained responsive to people's individual needs and provided personalised care and support. People had complex communication needs and these were individually assessed and met. Speech and language advice had been sought to find the best way to communicate with people. People were able to make choices about their day to day lives. The provider had a complaints policy in place and the complaints process was discussed with people at residents’ meetings. This was available in an accessible format to help people raise concerns when they were not able to verbalise this. No concerns had been received. The senior staff we spoke with and the registered manager confirmed any complaints received would be fully investigated and responded to.

The service continued to be well led. People lived in a service where the registered manager’s values and vision were embedded into the service, staff and culture. Staff told us the registered manager was very approachable, well liked and respected and made themselves available. The registered manager and provider had monitoring systems which enabled them to identify good practices and areas of improvement. Quality assurance feedback was acted upon to make continued improvements.

People lived in a service which had been designed and adapted to meet their needs. People had access to the registered manager’s farm and enjoyed happy times with the animals. The service was monitored by the registered manager and provider to help ensure its ongoing quality and safety. The provider’s governance framework, helped monitor the culture and leadership of the service, as well as the ongoing quality and safety of the care people were receiving.