Background to this inspection
Updated
6 March 2019
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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team:
One Inspector.
Service and service type:
Cascade (Cohen House) is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
A registered manager was not in post. This means that the provider had sole legal responsibility for how the service was run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. A manager had been appointed and was in the process of submitting their registration application.
Notice of inspection:
We gave the service one days’ notice of the inspection site visit because some of the people using it needed support to understand and prepare for our visit.
What we did:
We reviewed information we had received about the service since they were registered. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse. We sought feedback from the local authority and other professionals who work with the service. We assessed the information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection we spoke with two people and two relatives to ask about their experience of the care provided. Not all people in the service were able to provide detailed verbal feedback. We also observed the support staff provided. We spoke with six members of care staff. This included; two support workers, two group managers, the deputy manager and the manager.
We reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records and two people’s medicine records. We also looked at two staff files, records relating to training and supervision of staff, records relating to complaints and records relating to the management of the home.
Following our site visit we spoke with two further relatives and five health and social care professionals. We also reviewed additional documents the manager had sent us.
Updated
6 March 2019
About the service: Cascade (Cohen House) is a care home that provides personal care and nursing care for up to eight people. The service was registered in December 2017 under our 'Registering the right support' guidance. The building design fitted in to the residential area and there were deliberately no identifying signs to indicate it was a care home. The service primarily focused on providing care and support to young people with learning disabilities. The accommodation was provided over two floors and was purpose built for people using the service. This included the provision of a sensory room, sensory garden, two lounges, a large communal kitchen and diner, a one-to-one kitchen, and a bathroom with hydro-therapy bath to the ground floor. Bedrooms with en-suite facilities were provided on both ground and first floor.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿ The outcomes for people using the service reflected the values and principles of Registering the Right Support. These ensure that people living in the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice, and independence.
¿There was a strong emphasis on human rights and a positive approach to risk taking which helped to safeguard and enhance the quality of people’s lives.
¿Medicines and infection control were managed safely.
¿ There was a tailored and flexible approach to staffing with a clear focus on recruiting and retaining staff with the right values for the service.
¿The service provided effective care which delivered very positive outcomes for people.
¿ Staff worked with each other and other professionals to ensure the support they provided to people was in line with best practice, guidance, and legislation.
¿Staff worked collaboratively to put people in full control of their health needs.
¿The service was proactive in supporting people to live healthy lives which included support with good nutrition.
¿ The provider had ensured the environment was adapted to meet the specific needs of people using the service.
¿Staff were able to access training and other learning opportunities which supported them to provide effective care.
¿ The service understood the importance of consent and took steps to ensure people’s consent was sought.
¿ People were supported by caring staff who worked hard to deliver a good quality of life for people in the service.
¿ Various communication tools were utilised in order to aid people to express their views and be involved in their care.
¿ There was a strong and clear focus on supporting people to be as independent as possible.
¿ The support provided was individual to people’s needs.
¿ There was a collaborative approach, working with people, relatives, and other professionals, to plan people’s care.
¿ Complaints and issues were dealt with in an open, positive and reflective manner.
¿The service was well led. There was a clear organisational structure and quality assurance frameworks were in place.
¿ The provider had a clear vision and values which were shared by staff. Staff were highly motivated to provide a good quality of life for people in the service.
¿ Morale was high and there was a positive and enthusiastic energy.
¿ The management team engaged in continuous learning and were keen to continue to develop the service through engaging with best practice and guidance.
Rating at last inspection: This was the service’s first rating inspection following the registration of the service in December 2017.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on when the service was first registered.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.