Archived: Autus Court

Updated 4 January 2020

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 was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Autus Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and 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

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because the service is small and people are often out and we wanted to be sure there would be people at home to speak with us.

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 three people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the director of operations, registered manager, team leader, senior care workers and care workers.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and medicine records. We looked at two 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 received feedback from two relatives and a professional who worked closely with the service.

Updated 4 January 2020

About the service

Autus Court is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for people with learning disabilities and sensory impairment. There were six people receiving support at the time of our inspection.

The service has been developed and designed 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 receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

There were deliberately no identifying signs, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.

The service used some restrictive intervention practices as a last resort, in a person-centred way, in line with positive behaviour support principles.

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

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and be part of the wider community.

People were safe using the service. Staff rotas reflected the support people required to maintain the choices they had made, and as a result the staffing arrangements were flexible to meet their needs.

Staff had good understanding of each person's individual needs and preferences and used this knowledge to provide them with flexible, responsive support which enhanced the quality of their lives.

People had complex needs and demonstrated behaviour that may challenge services. People received care that was based on best practice guidelines that met their individual needs and successfully reduced instances of incidents within the service.

Comprehensive assessments were made before people began using the service. People's care and support were completely person centred and designed around each person's individual needs, styles, preferences, and values. People were closely involved in the development and updating of their individual care plan and met with staff on a regular basis to discuss and agree any changes.

People's diversity and individuality was celebrated and people worked with a consistent staff group that they could form caring relationships with. Staff were proud of the support that they provided to people and the positive outcomes that they had observed.

Staff were caring and friendly and supported people with kindness and compassion. Staff had an empowering attitude to support people's personal development, and each person was supported in a way that was individual to them.

People made great progress whilst they used the service and people were encouraged to achieve their goals. People were able to gain their independence and this was celebrated with staff.

People's health and well-being was monitored by staff and they were supported to access health professionals in a timely manner when they needed to. People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink to maintain a healthy and balanced diet.

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.

People, their relatives, and professionals felt the service was well run and commented on the positive approach of the management team.

Quality assurance systems were in place to ensure the standards of care were maintained and if necessary improved.

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 (published 24 March 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.