Glenmore Trust - 2 Newton Road

Updated 22 November 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 31 October 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider 24 hours' notice to ensure some people would be available at the service as it was a small service.

It was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service as part of our inspection. This included the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send CQC within required timescales. We also contacted commissioners from the Local Authorities who contracted people’s care and one professional who provided support to some people who used the service.

During this inspection we carried out general observations.

During the inspection we spoke with two people who used the service at Newton Rd, the registered manager, the operations support manager, one team leader and four support workers. We reviewed a range of records about people's care and how the service was managed. We looked at care records for four people, two people’s medicines records, three staff records, staffing rosters, staff meeting minutes, meeting minutes for people who used the service, maintenance contracts and quality assurance audits the registered manager had completed. After the site visit we telephoned three relatives.

Updated 22 November 2018

2, Newton Road is a residential care home. It is registered to provide short-term respite care for up to three people who may have a learning disability. An outreach service is also provided with additional staff which was not looked at during this inspection.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service accommodated three people at the time of the inspection. The accommodation is provided from a purpose-built bungalow and has suitable adaptations for people who may have limited mobility.

The care service was developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. The model of care proposed from 2015 and 2016 guidance that people with learning disabilities and/or autism spectrum disorder which proposed smaller community based housing. 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.

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.

People told us they were safe and were well cared for. Staff knew about safeguarding vulnerable adults procedures. There were enough staff available to provide individual care and support to each person. Staff upheld people's human rights and treated everyone with great respect and dignity.

The atmosphere in the service was lively and welcoming and the building was well-maintained with a good standard of hygiene.

There were opportunities for staff to receive training to meet people’s care needs. A system was in place for staff to receive supervision and appraisal and there were robust recruitment processes being used when staff were employed.

People were predominantly 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 supported this practice. However, we have made a recommendation about mental capacity and best interest decision making for checks to be made if a deprivation of liberty was required for some people to keep them safe.

Staff knew the people they were supporting well. Risk assessments were in place and they accurately identified current risks to the person as well as ways for staff to minimise or appropriately manage those risks.

Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care. Staff had developed good relationships with people and were caring in their approach. Care was provided with patience and kindness.

People were provided with opportunities to follow their interests and hobbies and they were introduced to new activities. They were supported to contribute and to be part of the local community.

Information was made available in a format that helped people to understand if they did not read. This included a complaints procedure. People we spoke with said they knew how to complain.

People were supported by staff who knew their individual dietary requirements and how to support them in the right way. People had access to healthcare professionals when they required them. People received their medicines in a safe way.

Staff said the management team were supportive and approachable. Communication was effective, ensuring people, their relatives and other relevant agencies were kept up-to-date about any changes in people's care and support needs and the running of the service.

The provider undertook a range of audits to check on the quality of care provided. People had the opportunity to give their views about the service. There was consultation with people and family members and their views were used to improve the service. We discussed with the registered manager this could be extended to obtain people’s views after each stay. Also to consider the formation of a forum, made up of representatives of people who used the service, to consult with them and involve them in the running of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.