The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Spring View

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Preston Grove, Yeovil, Somerset, BA20 2DU (01935) 474303

Provided and run by:
Somerset County Council - Specialist Public Health Nursing

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

11 January 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 11 January 2017 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice because it is a small care home and people may have been out. We also wanted to be certain the registered manager would be available when we visited.

The service was previously inspected on 1 and 4 December 2015 when we found breaches of Regulation 12; Safe care and treatment, and Regulation 17; Good governance. At this inspection we found actions had been taken to address the issues found at the last inspection.

Spring view is one of a number of services operated by this provider. The home provides care and support to up to six people with profound and multiple learning disabilities. It is has five bedrooms in the main part of the house and one bedroom in an attached, but self-contained, flat. The home has been adapted to meet the needs of the people who currently live there. It is situated in a quiet residential area of Yeovil. At the time of this inspection there were six people living there.

The people we met had complex learning disabilities and not all were able to tell us about their experiences of life at the home. We therefore used our observations of care and our discussions with staff to help form our judgements.

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 we found three breaches of our regulations. These related to safe care and treatment and lack of adequate governance systems. Risks to people at night had not been fully considered, care and support plans had not been regularly reviewed, and systems to monitor the quality of the service were not fully effective. At this inspection we found that risk assessments had been put in place to ensure that staff working alone at night were able to hear if people required assistance, and knew how to request management advice and support, or additional staff if necessary. We also found that care plans and risk assessments had been reviewed and updated. Quality monitoring systems were in place to ensure most aspects of the service were regularly checked and actions carried out where improvements were needed. However, we found one new breach of regulation relating to the storage of controlled drugs.

People’s medicines were not always stored securely. Each person had secure storage facilities in their rooms for their medicines. The medicine cabinets were suitable for most medicines, but did not provide adequate security for those medicines classified as controlled drugs. We have made a recommendation that the provider seeks advice from a reputable source on suitable storage facilities for controlled drugs to comply with their legal obligations. Staff had received training on the safe administration of medicines and records showed staff had administered and recorded all medicines appropriately, and in line with the prescriber’s instructions.

Risk assessments were completed and staff had access to information on how to support people to remain safe. However, the way the information was presented may mean that staff did not always read the full information and may not follow the advice safely, for example foods that people with swallowing difficulties may eat safely. The registered manager told us they would take immediate action to address this. A member of staff told us a training session on eating and drinking was planned for the following day.

People were protected from the risk of harm as staff had been trained to recognise and report abuse. Safe recruitment procedures were followed before new staff began working with people. All staff completed a thorough induction at the start of their employment to ensure they had the skills needed to meet people’s needs effectively.

The service respected people’s human rights and diversity and promoted people’s rights to make choices and decisions about their lives where possible. Staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Capacity assessments had been carried out where appropriate and best interest decisions had been made where necessary through discussion and agreement with relatives and professionals who knew people well.

People were supported by kind and caring staff. People who were unable to verbally express themselves appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff. We asked one person if they were happy living at the home and they replied “Yes” with a very big smile. Staff were attentive, calm and gentle in all interactions with people. We asked three relatives if they felt staff were caring. One replied, “Oh yes, definitely.” The second relative said “We feel very fortunate that (person’s name) was given a placement there. We are reassured that he is happy where he is.” Another relative said, “We are very happy with the care. They are very understanding”.

.

We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

1 and 4 December 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 1 and 4 December 2015.

The last inspection of the home was carried out on 4 June 2013. No concerns were identified with the care being provided to people at that inspection.

Spring view is one of a number of services operated by this provider. The home provides care and support to up to six people with profound and multiple learning disabilities. It is has five bedrooms in the main part of the house and one bedroom in an attached, but self- contained, flat. The home has been adapted to meet the needs of the people who currently live there. It is situated in a quiet residential area of Yeovil.

The people we met had complex learning disabilities and not all were able to tell us about their experiences of life at the home. We therefore used our observations of care and our discussions with staff to help form our judgements.

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.

The atmosphere in the home was very relaxed and welcoming. There was an ethos that this was very much the home of the people who lived there. One member of staff said “This is their home. I am just privileged to be able to work here.” People were cared for by staff who were kind and considerate.

The procedures for assessing and monitoring the health, safety and welfare of the people who used the service were not fully effective. Shortfalls identified at this inspection were similar to those found during an internal quality audit which had been carried out in April, September and December 2015 but had not yet been actioned.

Risks to people at night had not always been fully considered. One person was not routinely checked during the night and there was no risk assessment in place.

Staff knew people well however; people’s care and support plans had not always been regularly reviewed and they did not always reflect people’s current needs.

Between the hours of 2200hrs and 0700hrs there was one waking support worker on duty. All but one person was checked hourly during the night. People had very complex needs associated with their learning disabilities and all required staff support to meet all aspects of their needs. Staff told us there was no formal on-call system for obtaining additional staff if needed.

People received their medicines when they needed them. Medicines were stored securely and were only administered by staff who had been trained and deemed competent to carry out the task.

Staff knew how to recognise and report any signs of abuse. They told us they would not hesitate in reporting concerns and were confident action would be taken to ensure people were safe.

Staff received the training they needed which enabled them to support the people who lived at the home.

People were always asked for their consent before staff assisted them with any tasks and staff knew the procedures to follow to make sure people’s legal and human rights were protected.

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and dehydration. Menus were based on people’s preferences. Meal times were flexible and were determined by the people who lived at the home. People were provided with adapted cups and cutlery which met their needs and enabled them to maintain a level of independence.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

4 June 2013

During a routine inspection

The people who live at the home had communication difficulties and complex support needs. One person told us that he liked his room and his bed, and another person told us staff listened. We also observed people showing that they were contented by smiling and engaging with their environment and staff. We saw people greeted with affection, praised appropriately and heard laughter between the people who live in the home and staff. We saw staff respond to non verbal communication in a timely manner, and to speak respectfully and kindly. We saw people supported to undertake a wide array of daily living tasks in a person centred way.

People and their representatives were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. Their needs were assessed regularly and care was delivered in line with their individual care plans.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. One care worker told us 'I can always ask, everyone will help you."

The home had an effective system in place to monitor the quality of the service and to assess and manage risks to people living in the home.

2 July 2012

During a routine inspection

Most people who lived in the home had communication difficulties so we were not able to ask them about life in the home. We did ask two people if they were happy living at the home and they were able to say 'yes' they were.

We spent most of our time in communal areas where we observed communication and interaction between the people who lived in the home and the staff who supported them. People had complex care needs and used different methods of communication. They were supported by staff who knew them well and were experienced in using communication aids, such as sign language. When people were not able to use clear speech or other communication methods, staff were good at recognising and interpreting responses, gestures and vocalisations.

People were given the opportunity to make the best use of their own skills and

abilities. People helped prepare meals if they wished to. A table had recently been placed in the kitchen to help people who used wheelchairs do this. People ate independently if they were able to. People who used wheelchairs or other mobility aids moved themselves freely around the home. Staff only offered or provided help when people needed it.

People who lived in the home appeared well cared for. Staff were available when they needed them. Two people were able to confirm that they were well cared for by staff.

One person had one to one staff support. The other people who lived in the home shared the staff who were on duty at any time. There were enough staff to meet people's needs on the day we visited. We saw that people were well supported with physiotherapy, personal care, meals and trips out of the home. Staff were not rushed and had time for people. There was a relaxed atmosphere throughout our visit.