Beaman House

Updated 25 October 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 12 October 2018 and was announced. We gave short notice because the service is small and we wanted to ensure staff and the manager would be available to speak with us on the day of our inspection visit. Further opportunity for visiting relatives, healthcare professionals and staff to give us feedback about the care given at the service was given by us displaying a poster in the home about our inspection visit, together with our contact details. One inspector undertook the inspection.

Prior to our inspection visit, we reviewed the information we held about the service. We reviewed statutory notifications sent to us from the provider. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

We did not request a Provider Information Collection (PIC) prior to this inspection. This is information that 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. During our inspection visit, we gave the manager and provider opportunities to tell us what they did well and their future plans for the service.

We spent time with people and observed communal areas where people interacted with staff. This helped us judge whether people’s needs were appropriately met and to identify if people experienced good standards of care.

During the inspection we spoke with all four people that lived at Beaman House. We spoke with two relatives, three care staff, the manager and provider organisational manager.

We reviewed two people’s care plans, daily records and medicine administration records. We also looked at the management of records and quality assurance audits the manager and provider made to assure themselves people received a safe, effective quality service.

Updated 25 October 2018

We inspected this service on 11 October 2018. The inspection was announced and carried out by one inspector.

The service is a ‘care home’ operated by P.A.K.S Trust; a non-profit and independent provider of support for people with learning disabilities, autism, mental health conditions, complex needs and behaviours that challenge. Beaman House is one of six services provided by P.A.K.S Trust and provides accommodation with personal care for up to five adults. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of our inspection visit, there were four people living at the home.

The registered manager who was in post at the last inspection had left the service. Another manager, registered for one of the provider's other services, had been managing Beaman House since the previous manager had left. The present manager thought they were registered with us to manage Beaman House. They were unaware that their registered manager's application they had submitted, had been rejected by us in December 2017 as it was not fully completed.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons.’ Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At our last inspection in February 2016 we rated the service as Good. At this inspection, we found the quality of the care had been maintained and people continued to receive a service that was safe, caring, effective and responsive to their needs. The rating continues to be Good.

There were enough staff on shift with the appropriate levels of skill, experience and support to meet people’s needs and provide effective care. Risk management plans were in place for identified risks to people's care. Staff knew what action to take in the event of an emergency.

Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risks of abuse. Staff had received ‘safeguarding’ training and would raise concerns under the provider’s safeguarding policies. The provider checked staff’s suitability to deliver care and support during the recruitment process. Staff received training and used their skills, knowledge and experience to provide safe care to people.

People were encouraged and supported to maintain good health. Staff supported people to access healthcare services whenever needed. People received their prescribed medicines in a safe way.

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and worked within the principles of the Act. The manager understood their responsibilities under the Act and when ‘best interests’ meetings should take place. The manager had applied to the supervisory authority for the right to deprive two people of their liberty when their care and support included restrictions in the person’s ‘best interests’.

Staff supported people with kindness and in a caring way. Relatives felt staff were caring and involved them with their family member’s support.

People had individual plans of care which provided staff with the information they needed about people's care and support. People were able to take part in individual leisure activities according to their preferences. There were also opportunities for people to attend a day centre operated by the provider.

Staff were happy in their job role and felt supported by the manager through team meetings and one to one supervision meetings.

People and their relatives had no complaints about the service. They felt the manager would deal with any concern if they needed to raise something.

The provider and manager checked the quality of the service to make sure people’s needs were met safely and effectively. Feedback on a day to day basis from people was encouraged by staff. The provider and manager understood their regulatory responsibilities and worked with other organisations and healthcare professionals to ensure positive outcomes for people who lived at the home.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.