Archived: Merrington Grange

Merrington Grange 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. Merrington Grange is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to nine people who have learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection eight people were living there.

Merrington Grange 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.

A manager was in post and was resent throughout this inspection. They had recently been appointed by the provider and had yet to register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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.

People continued to remain safe as staff knew how to recognise and respond to concerns of ill-treatment and abuse. There were enough staff to support people to meet their needs. Staff members followed safe infection prevention and control practices. The provider followed safe recruitment procedures when employing new staff members. The provider learnt from incidents and accidents and worked with people and families to minimise the risk of reoccurrence if things had gone wrong.

People were safely supported with their medicines by competent staff members. People received care and support from staff members who had received training and support to effectively assist them. New staff members received an introduction to their role and were equipped with the skills they needed to work with people.

People continued to receive care that was effective and personalised to their individual needs and preferences. 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 supported this practice. People were able to access areas of their own home and garden.

People received support that continued to be caring and respectful. People were supported by a staff team that was compassionate, thoughtful and kind. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by those providing assistance. People were supported at times of upset and distress.

People, and when needed family or advocates, continued to be involved in developing their own care and support plans. When changes occurred in people’s personal and medical circumstances, these plans were reviewed to reflect these changes. The management team had procedures in place to address people’s care as they approached end of life. People’s individual preferences were known by staff members who supported them as they wished. People and their relatives were encouraged to raise any concerns or complaints. The provider had systems in place to address any issues raised with them.

Merrington Grange continued to be well-led by a management team that people and staff found approachable and supportive. People were involved in decisions about their care and support and their suggestions were valued by the provider. Staff members believed their opinions and ideas were listened to by the provider and, if appropriate, implemented. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of service they provided and where necessary made changes to drive improvements.

Although we met six people in the home, most were not able to express their views about the service they received in any detail. However, one person told us that the staff were, "Brilliant".

Everyone we met appeared happy in the home. People were comfortable with the staff and their surroundings.

Staff met people's care and support needs in ways that they preferred and we saw that detailed records gave staff the information they needed to do this. Plans were in place to support people to enjoy their lives and staff were aware of risks, people's rights and their responsibilities.

We saw that the home's policies had been reproduced in an easy to read format to help people understand and be involved in how the home was run.

We found that care plans were person centred. People and their relatives had been involved in developing their care plans. The plans were regularly reviewed.

We found that appropriate checks were properly carried out on staff before they were allowed to start work, although records were kept at the company's head office rather than in the home.

The provider had a suitable complaints procedure in place. It had been made available to people's relatives and representatives and was also available in an easy to read format.