Linwood House

Updated 18 September 2019

Background to this inspection

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an assistant inspector.

Service and service type

Linwood is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both premises and the care provided, both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

The inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We contacted Healthwatch, this is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spent time with people at the service and spoke with three people who used the service and two relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the registered manager, senior care workers, and care workers.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with two professionals who regularly visit the service.

Updated 18 September 2019

About the service

Linwood House provides accommodation and care for adults with learning disabilities. The service accommodated people in one building and was registered to support up to 13 people. At the time of the inspection 13 people were living at the service.

The service worked in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service received planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them

The service was registered for the support of up to 13 people and 13 people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when supporting people outside the home.

People’s experience of using the service and what we found

People told us they were happy living at Linwood House and they felt safe. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to keep people safe from abuse and discrimination. People were protected from risks associated with the environment, and risks related to their health and welfare had been assessed, planned for and were regularly monitored. The service was clean and tidy.

People told us there were enough staff to support them and they regularly accessed the community, with staff or independently. People led active and fulfilling lives, one person worked, another did volunteer work. People were supported to pursue hobbies and interests.

Safe recruitment procedures were followed to ensure suitable staff were employed. Staff were well trained with the skills to provide care for people’s needs.

People were supported to take their medicines in a safe and timely way, medicines were stored and managed safely.

People were supported by staff who were kind and caring and who knew them well. The care delivered was around people’s individual needs. Technology was used to improve the service for people. People’s healthcare needs were well-managed, and staff sought support from health care professionals as required to support people effectively. People had a choice about what they ate and participated in planning and preparing meals.

People’s care plans were person-centred, and staff had the information required to provide care in an individualised way. People had the opportunity to give feedback and make suggestions to improve the service.

The service was well-led. Staff felt well supported by the registered manager. Quality systems were in place to monitor accidents, incidents and complaints, to learn lessons and make improvements.

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 8 February 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk