We carried out a review of the data available to us about Indigo on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Indigo, you can give feedback on this service.
Indigo is ‘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. The service is registered to accommodate two people. Both people were using the service on the day of our inspection visit.
The care service had 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. However, people were given choices and their independence and participation within the local community encouraged.
At our last inspection on 5 January 2016 we rated the service ‘good.’ At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of ‘good’ overall. 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.
People continued to receive a safe service where they were protected from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse. Risks associated with people’s needs had been assessed and planned for. Risk assessments were reviewed monthly to ensure they reflected people’s most up to date circumstances.
People were supported by a core team of staff who were suitably skilled and experienced staff to meet their needs. The people using the service were supported to be independent and they required mainly prompting rather than ‘hands-on’ support. People were prompted to take their medicines when they needed them.
Safe staff recruitment procedures were in place and used to ensure that only staff who met the services high standards worked there. Incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence and protect people from harm.
People continued to receive an effective service. Staff received the training and support that was specific and relevant to people’s individual needs. People were advised about the importance of a healthy and balanced diet. Staff supported people with their health needs and accompanied them to health care appointments if required.
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. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 were followed. People’s independence was promoted and they were supported to make informed choices about their care and support.
People continued to receive care from staff who treated them with dignity and respected their privacy. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported. They knew how to comfort people when they were anxious.
People continued to receive care and support that met their needs. People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person and or their relative where required. Care plans were detailed and read by staff when they were updated.
People were supported to pursue their interests and hobbies when they wanted to. Staff respected people’s choices about how they spent their time. There was a complaint procedure in an easy to read format that people could access if they wanted to make a complaint.
The service did not have a registered manager but a person with long experience of the service had applied to be the registered manager. They were supported by an operations manager. The provider had effective arrangements for monitoring the quality of the service.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection took place on 5 January 2016 and was unannounced.
Indigo is owned by Innova House Heath Care Limited and offers ground floor accommodation for two adults with learning disabilities, but who were semi-independent. There were two people living there when we visited.
There was a registered manager in place at the time of this inspection, but not available during this inspection. However, a new acting manager was taking over responsibility for the service and had started the process to register. This manager was based in another service close by, but visited Indigo each day. 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 were safe and protected from harm at Indigo. Any risks to the safety of people were assessed and reduced as far as possible. There were always enough staff available to ensure people were safe and, when needed, people received their medicines safely.
A range of training was available to staff to support them in meeting people’s needs. They had information about the Mental Capacity Act and the service ensured people’s rights were protected.
People always received enough to eat and drink and independence with choosing and cooking food was promoted. People’s on-going health was regularly discussed with them, promoted and monitored.
Staff showed kindness and compassion in the way they spoke with people. People were supported to maintain relationships with family and friends and there were no restrictions on visitors.
Staff showed respect for people’s privacy and dignity. They understood the importance of confidentiality, keeping all personal information about people safe and secure.
The service was responsive to individual interests and preferences and plans of support and care were person-centred and specific to people’s individual needs. People knew they could raise concerns and make specific requests at any time.
The service was well led and the quality of care was monitored by a management team on behalf of the provider.