Archived: Rowan House

Updated 23 October 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. 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 on one inspector, and two assistant inspectors.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats and specialist housing. At the time of inspection, the service were supporting 150 people. They also provided a supported living service to people living in three ‘supported living’ setting[s], so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

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

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we wanted to make sure that people using the service had time to consent to see us and we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

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. 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. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with six people who used the service and four relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 12 members of staff including the registered manager, three team leaders, human resource manager and operational manager and six members of care staff. We also spoke with three external health and social care professionals.

We visited people in their own homes and in shared living accommodation. We observed interactions between care staff and people receiving a service.

We observed a care review for a person in their own home by a multidisciplinary team, which included the person, their loved one, care staff and external health and social care professionals.

We reviewed a range of records. This included eight peoples care plans and risk assessments and medication records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. And we reviewed a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures, incidents and accidents, compliments and complaints and lessons learnt.

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 had regularly involvement at the service.

Updated 23 October 2019

Rowan House provides a supported living service and personal care for people who are unable to provide it for themselves because of old age, illness or disability. Where people live in their own home they receive care and support in order to promote their independence. As there is a separation between the care and accommodation, the care they receive is regulated by the CQC but the accommodation is not. On the day of our inspection, 150 people were using the service but not everyone was receiving a regulated activity. Some of the people using the service had complex needs and the frequency of the care and support depended on people's individual requirements.

The provider of the service had merged with the previous established provider in April 2018. The previous provider had constantly demonstrated they were providing good quality care. As part of the merger the new provider had retained a well-established staff group, including senior leaders such as the registered manager. Peabody Limited has three additional adult care services which have been inspected by the commission, and rated as good, with one that had outstanding features.

Supported living

People receiving supported living services rented accommodation separately from the care that was provided by the service. These were small shared houses and bungalows. Where care staff were required to remain at the service overnight, they were provided with appropriate sleeping arrangements.

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

People received an exceptionally safe service. Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible to ensure that they were able to lead their best lives. The providers policies and systems supported this practice.

Staff had an excellent understanding of how to safeguard vulnerable people. The service had a very open and transparent culture and staff and people were supported to speak up if they had any concerns. All staff were recruited safely and people using the service were involved in this process.

People received a very effective service. Staff had access to great training opportunities and had an excellent understanding and knowledge of best practice relating to individual people’s care needs. All staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and people were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives.

People had access to a variety of health and social care services to enhance their physical and mental wellbeing. Healthcare professionals spoke highly of the support people received.

Staff were exceptionally caring and often went the extra mile to support people to live their best lives, including after their working day had finished. Professionals, relatives and people were very positive about the care that was provided. People were treated with respect and dignity and staff understood the value of maximising people’s independence and the positive impact this would have on people’s lives.

People received a service that was not only responsive to their needs but also incredibly person centred. Care plans documented how staff should manage identified individual risks to people, without imposing unnecessary restrictions on their lives. Disability was not viewed as a barrier to people accessing all potential opportunities, rather it was a challenge to find ways to support people to live in the way they wanted.

External professionals, people receiving a service and relatives told us that this service was outstandingly led. The registered manager acted as an exceptionally strong role model to all levels of staff. They were knowledgeable, kept up to date with all best practice guidance and disseminated this to staff effectively. There was a shared vision that every person receiving a service had their potential maximised. Team leaders and senior managers shared this passion and supported staff to work creatively with people to mitigate and manage potential risks, supporting them to lead fulfilling and meaningful lives. Staff had a high level of commitment and connection with the people in their care.

The registered manager operated a transparent service, constantly learning and sharing ideas, experiences and lessons learnt, not only within the organisation, but externally when networking with other health and social care services. This learning, open and transparent culture was filtered down throughout the staff group and ensured that people received outstanding care.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (23 December 2016). Since this rating was awarded the registered provider of the service has changed. We have used the previous rating to inform our planning and decisions about the rating at this inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating of the service under the previous provider.

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.