Sefton Street

Updated 24 August 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 was a comprehensive inspection. The inspection took place on 31 July 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides was a small care home for adults who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. We checked the information that we held about the service and the service provider. This included statutory notifications sent to us by the registered manager about incidents and events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law. We used all of this information to plan how the inspection should be conducted.

During the inspection we used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who lived at Sefton Street. This was because the people who lived there communicated in different ways and we were not able to directly ask some of them about their experiences. We spent a short time observing the support provided to help us understand people's experiences of the service. Our observations showed people appeared relaxed and at ease with the staff.

We spoke with a range of people about the service including a person who lived in the home, two relatives, and three staff members including the registered manager. We looked at the care files for the people living at Sefton Street, two staff recruitment files, staff training records, medication administration record (MAR) sheets and other records relating to the management of the home.

Updated 24 August 2018

Sefton Street is a residential care home for three adults with autism. The home is a large terraced house with three bedrooms, lounge, a walk-in shower and bathroom. The home is within walking distance of Southport town centre. There were three people living in the home at the time of our inspection.

At our last inspection 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 we spoke with told us that staff supported them when they needed it. We saw through people's body language and chatter between them and staff that they were comfortable with the staff.

There were robust measures in place to ensure people were safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults from abuse and knew what to do if they saw or suspected abuse. Risk assessments were in place specific to their individual needs and any behaviour they may present. They included detailed guidance for staff so people could be supported appropriately.

There was sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs. Some people required staff support to access the community and take part in activities. Staff had been appropriately recruited to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. We found that staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people effectively and safely. Staff were supported by the manager through regular supervisions and regular training. Staff meetings were held regularly.

Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff had been trained to administer medicines in order to ensure errors were kept to a minimum.

We found the home clean with no odours. The home was well maintained and in good decorative order. People's bedrooms were personalised.

Regular checks and tests, such as gas, electricity, water safety and for fire safety were completed to maintain safety in the home.

People's needs were assessed and reviewed regularly to reflect people's current health and support needs. Appointments were made regularly with, for example, the GP, dentist and practice nurse, to help to maintain good health. People were supported to achieve their outcomes to maintain and increase their independence with activities of daily living, including personal care, meal preparation, shopping, laundry and travelling.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. We saw that people were encouraged to eat healthily and adopt an active lifestyle.

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 made decisions and choices in relation to their care, support received, daily routines and any activities they wished to take part in. Staff knew the people well and how they communicated their needs and choices, including their preferred daily routine.

People were supported to maintain regular contact and spent time with their families.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care plans were written for the individual and informed staff of their preferences and wishes. We found they contained detailed information that enabled staff to meet people's needs. Support plans were completed to show the goals people wanted to achieve. Clear records of people's daily routines helped to ensure staff supported people according to their preference. The use of a 'visual planner' provided reassurance for which staff were supporting a person each day.

People enjoyed a range of activities, with staff support. They accessed their local community to enjoy amenities such as pub lunches, shopping, the gym, museums, and the theatre. The location of the home afforded easy access to local shops, the town promenade and beach.

There was a complaints policy in place. A complaint had been received and had been investigated according to the providers procedure, with a satisfactory outcome.

There was a person-centred and open culture in the home. Staff showed a commitment to provide support which achieved good outcomes for the people living in the home.

Quality assurance audits were completed by support staff and the registered manager which included, medication and health and safety checks.

There was a process completed annually where relatives had the opportunity to voice their opinions about the service. Feedback we saw was positive and complimentary.

There was a registered manager in the home. They were supported by support workers and an area manager. The registered manager and registered provider met their legal requirements with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). They had submitted notifications and the ratings from the last inspection were clearly

displayed in the home.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.