Beach House

Beach House is registered to accommodate up to seven people. At the time of our inspection there were seven people living at the home in one adapted building in a residential area of Poole.

We found the following examples of good practice.

There was clear, detailed written guidance and information available for all visitors on entry to the service so they could understand what was required of them during their visit to ensure their own and people's safety. There was a supply of masks available at the entrance to the home for all visitors and a good system of meeting and escorting all visitors to the washroom to enable hand washing to maintain people's safety. There were separate zoned areas for putting on and removing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and good use of separate entrances for family members to ensure people's safety. Stringent cleaning schedules for the whole home were in operation and the provider had nominated a lead Infection Prevention and Control member of staff.

People were supported well if they had to spend time in self isolation. Staff adhered to the government guidelines and wore appropriate levels of PPE when providing support to these people. Staff ensured people were provided with dedicated one to one time with staff who used the time creatively to ensure people were not socially excluded, or left for long periods on their own during their time in isolation. This included setting up a mini dining area in their bedroom so they could enjoy their meals in ways they preferred, which was important to them.

The service showed innovation and creativity in helping people to maintain activities that were important to them when outside facilities had been closed due to lockdown. Staff had created a mini 'coffee bar' at the bottom of the garden so that people who enjoyed going out for a coffee could still visit the 'coffee bar' which was an important part of their routine. A variety of garden activities and swings had been purchased which enabled people to spend time relaxing in the fresh air which they enjoyed and reduced their levels of anxiety. A gazebo and garden furniture had been purchased which provided a comfortable area for family visits. Staff had supported people to decorate the gazebo and garden area which provided much enjoyment.

Beach House is registered to accommodate up to seven people. At the time of our inspection there were six people living at the home in one adapted building in a residential area of Poole.

At our last inspection in May 2016 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.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Some people had lived at Beach House for a number of years. They were all supported to maintain regular contact with their families if they wished to. The service reflects 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.

People told us they enjoyed living at Beach House and liked the people who lived there and staff who supported them. We received positive feedback from relatives and health professionals who visited the home regularly.

People were supported by appropriate numbers of trained, experienced staff who knew the people who lived at Beach House very well. Staff understood how to identify and report abuse and were well supported in their roles. Staff received up to date training on all core subjects as well as ad hoc training for subjects that interested them such as specialist medicine training. Staff received specialised training in a timely manner. This enabled them to support and care for people with specific health needs safely.

People made their own choices about how they spent their day. Staff had a good knowledge and understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and promoted people's independence and choice in their day to day living. Where people might lack capacity to make a specific decision staff acted in accordance with the MCA.

People were supported to take their medicines safely by staff who had received the appropriate levels of training.

People's health care needs were met and staff supported people to see healthcare professionals when appropriate.

People were encouraged and supported to take part in a wide range of activities, hobbies and visits into the local community. People told us they really enjoyed their activities which promoted their independence and maintained their sense of wellbeing.

People and relatives knew how to make a complaint and felt any concerns would be actioned straight away.

There were quality assurance systems in place to drive continuous improvement and ensure the home offered a safe, effective, caring and responsive service.

There was a registered manager. 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.

Beach House is a care home for up to seven people with learning disabilities in Poole. At the time of the inspection there were seven people living there.

Some people living at Beach House were able to tell us their experiences. Where people communicated differently and were not able to tell us their experiences. We saw that those people and the people we spoke with were smiling, gave staff eye contact, and were happy and relaxed in the home. They interacted with staff and some of them interacted with the other people they lived with.

People received care and support in a personalised way. Staff knew people well and understood their needs and the way they communicated. We found that people received the health, personal and social care support they needed.

People were relaxed with staff which may have indicated they were comfortable and felt safe with them. Other people and relatives told us they and their family members felt safe at the home. Staff knew how to recognise and respond to any signs of abuse. They co-operated with any investigations.

Medicines were managed safely and stored securely. People received their medicines as prescribed by their GP. Staff knew when they should administer PRN ‘as needed’ medicines.

Risks to people’s safety were assessed and managed to minimise risks. People were supported to take part in activities and experiences in the house and in the community.

Staff were caring and treated people with dignity and respect. People and staff had good relationships. People had access to the local community and had individual activities provided.

Staff received an induction, core training and some specialist training so they had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff were recruited safely.

The culture within the service was personalised. There was a clear management structure and people, relatives and staff felt comfortable raising any issues. There were systems in place to monitor and drive improvements in the safety and quality of the service provided.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. This was because some of them had complex needs which meant they were unable to tell us about themselves. We spoke with three people, observed staff supporting two people who did not communicate verbally, spoke with three staff and the manager.

People we spoke with told us they were happy living at the home. One person said 'I'm happy today I'm going to Swanage with XXX'. Another person pointed to staff photos and said 'like them all'.

We observed a very relaxed atmosphere in the home with lots of laughter and smiles from people living there. People freely approached staff and sought their company.

People and or their representatives were involved in decision making. Their privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted. People experienced care and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Medicines were managed, administered and stored safely.

People were cared for and supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

There were systems in place to regularly check and monitor the quality of the service.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. This was because some of them had complex needs which meant they were unable to tell us about themselves. We spoke with three people and observed staff supporting all five people at home. We also spoke with four staff, the acting manager and the provider's compliance assessor.

Three people we spoke with told us they were happy living at the home. One person said, 'I likes it here and feels safe' and another said, 'I like it, I do washing up and a bit of cooking. I go out on bus I've got a bus pass'.

We saw that staff knew each person's likes and dislikes and had good relationships with the people they cared for. They understood how people communicated and responded to people's non verbal cues and gestures.

People freely approached staff and sought their company. They smiled and laughed with the staff.

Staff told us that they had staff meetings, handovers and support meetings with their line manager.

There were systems in place to regularly check and monitor the quality of the service.

During this inspection we identified shortfalls in involving people or their representatives in decision making, care planning and medication management.