Rockfield House

Updated 14 November 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by an inspector, an inspection manager and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Rockfield House 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.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. The registered manager was not available on the day of our inspection. We were supported by the deputy manager.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We received an email after our inspection from a family member. We spoke with three members of staff including the deputy manager, the area manager, and the quality project coordinator.

We spent time in communal areas and the garden talking to people at length and asking them about their care and support. We also observed staff interaction and relationships with people. We reviewed a range of records including two people’s care records and two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at some additional quality assurance processes sent to us by email.

Updated 14 November 2019

About the service

Rockfield House is registered to provide care and accommodation for up to 14 adults with a learning disability, autism or mental health needs. The House is a spacious and has a separate annex building which is more semi-independent and used to help people transition into the community.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 14 people. Ten people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people. People set their own meal times around their individual plans for the day.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Everyone we spoke with said they felt safe living at the home. There was enough staff on duty to be able to support people safely. Staff recruitment and selection remained safe. Medication was well managed and stored correctly. Staff knew the correct process to follow if the felt someone was being harmed or abused.

Staff were trained and had the appropriate skills to support people safely. Staff engaged in regular supervision. There were no set meal times, people planned their own meal times in accordance with their own daily planner. Where needed, people were supported with their eating and drinking needs.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff treated people with kindness and respect. We observed staff supporting people in communal areas, and speaking to them with respect, offering choices and empowering people. People were involved in their care plans and review processes.

Information within support plans was person centred. These support plans contained information about people’s backgrounds, likes dislikes and routines Support plans were person centred and contained information about people’s backgrounds, likes, dislikes and routines. There was an emphasis on people achieving their own individual outcomes. People were supported to engage in employment opportunities where appropriate and complaints were well managed.

There was strong leadership and oversight within the service. Different audits had identified the need for positive changes to be implemented, most of which had already been actioned. The registered provider and the staff team had taken on board feedback from the last inspection and implemented some new processes, which were shared with us.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

The last rating for this service was good (published 24 March 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow Up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.