Hucknall Hope Lea Project

Updated 1 May 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This comprehensive inspection took place on the 5 April 2018 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and one Expert-by-Experiences (EXE). This is a person who has had personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

The inspection was informed by information we held about the service. Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is 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. This also included statutory notifications the provider had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send to us by law. We also considered the last inspection report and information that had been sent to us by other agencies. We also contacted commissioners who had a contract with the service and received feedback from a community care officer.

During the inspection, we spoke with three people who used the service and an additional person but very briefly, for their views about the service they received. We also spoke with one visiting relative and a further relative by telephone to gain their views about the service.

We spoke with the registered manager and two care workers. We looked at the care records of four people who used the service. The management of medicines, staff training records, four staff files, as well as a range of records relating to the running of the service. This included audits and checks and the management fire risks, policies and procedures, complaints and meeting records.

Updated 1 May 2018

We inspected the service on 5 April 2018. The inspection was unannounced.

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. Hucknall Hope Lea Project accommodates up to four people. On the day of our inspection, four people were using the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with 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.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

At the last inspection in October 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’ in all the key questions. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. 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.

People continued to receive a safe service where they were protected from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse. Risks associated with people’s needs including the environment, had been assessed and planned for and these were monitored for any changes. There were sufficient staff employed and deployed to meet people’s individual needs. Safe staff recruitment procedures were in place and used. People were supported to manage their medicines safely. Accidents and incidents were reported and acted upon to reduce further reoccurrence. The service was clean and infection control good practice guidance was used.

People continued to receive an effective service. Staff received an induction, ongoing training and support. People were fully involved in menu planning, shopping and cooking meals. The staff worked well with external health care professionals when additional guidance was required. People were supported with their health needs and accessed health services when required to maintain their health. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People continued to receive care from staff who were kind, compassionate and treated them with dignity and respected their privacy. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported, they understood people’s needs, preferences, and what was important to them. Advocacy information was not available but this information was sourced following our inspection.

People continued to receive a responsive service. People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person. People received opportunities to pursue their interests, hobbies and social activities were offered. People were also supported to participate in community activities and interests. The provider had made available the complaint procedure.

The service continued to be well-led. There was an open and transparent culture and good leadership. People received opportunities to share their feedback about the service and staff felt valued. The provider had quality assurance checks in place on quality and safety.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.