Archived: Royal Mencap Society - 34-35 Huddleston Close

Updated 1 December 2020

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

This inspection took place on 10 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 1 December 2020

We carried out this announced inspection on 9 and 11 October 2017. The provider was given notice of this inspection as it provides a service for people who may be out during the day. At our last inspection on 7 September 2015 we rated this service “Good”. At this inspection we found the service remained “Good”.

34-35 Huddleston Close is a small care home run by the Royal Mencap Society for up to four adults with learning disabilities. It consists of a three bedroom house with a shared lounge, kitchen and garden. Upstairs is a self-contained flat where one person lives with support. There were three people living in the service.

The service had a registered manager, who had been in post since May 2014. 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.

Since our last inspection, there had been some changes in people’s needs and the risks they faced through reduced mobility, health conditions and behaviour which may challenge. The provider continued to assess these risks and informed staff to carry out risk management plans to address these in a way which promoted people’s independence and positive risk taking. There had been changes to the building to address these, such as the use of sensor systems and high visibility tiling and flooring and there were measures such as streaming devices, objects of reference and sensory profiles in order to provide an environment which met people’s needs. There were support plans in place to manage people’s long term health conditions and to address behaviour which may challenge.

Staff continued to receive effective training and supervision to meet people’s needs, which was overseen by an effective system which also prompted managers to carry out observations of people’s practice. There had been one new member of staff recruited, and there were systems of safer recruitment and appropriate inductions for new staff and agency staff. Staffing levels remained suitable to meet people’s needs, and the provider was in the process of recruiting volunteers to support people to access the community.

There were detailed communication profiles in place to enable staff to better understand the needs of people who were non-verbal, which had continued to develop since the last inspection. Where there were concerns about people’s safety, these had been reported and investigated in line with safeguarding procedures and there was evidence of the provider learning from these and addressing poor practice. There had been improvements made to medicines procedures in response to a medicines error and an external audit, and staff were supported to learn from these, with medicines safely managed by staff who had been trained and observed as competent to do so. There were suitable checks of the safety of the environment and measures in place to ensure a safe evacuation in the event of an emergency.

Staff were encouraged to reflect on their practice and there was an open, listening culture from managers. There were systems such as daily shift reviews and recording of positive interactions to promote a culture of routinely learning from people’s experiences. Managers maintained systems to ensure that tasks were planned and carried out promptly and carried out innovative systems of audit which took a person centred approach to meeting people’s needs and promoting good health and inclusion.