Archived: Castle View House

Updated 30 March 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 inspection took place on 16 February 2016, was unannounced and carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We gathered and reviewed information about the service before the inspection. We examined previous inspection reports and 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 provider is required to tell us about by law.

We spoke with two people, and one relative about their experience of the service. We spoke with the provider and one member of staff. We asked two health and social care professionals for their views of the service.

We spent time looking at records, policies and procedures, complaint and incident and accident monitoring systems. We looked at two people’s care files, two staff record files, the staff training programme, the staff rota and medicine records.

At the previous inspection on 28 August 2014, the service had met the standards of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010.

Updated 30 March 2016

This inspection took place on the 16 February 2016 and was unannounced.

Castle View provides care and accommodation to up to eight adults with enduring mental illness. It has been run as a family business for more than 20 years, with the owners in day-to-day charge of the service. The premises looks and feels like a normal home, is well decorated and tastefully furnished. People were enabled to manage their mental health and recovery if they became unwell by the support provided by staff in the service. There were seven people using the service at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager. 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. A senior member of staff was in day-to-day charge of the service whilst the provider was actively recruiting a new manager.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The registered manager and staff showed that they understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

There were enough staff with the skills required to meet people’s needs. Staff were recruited using procedures designed to protect people from the employment of unsuitable staff.

Staff had been trained to recognise and respond to the signs of abuse. Discussions with them confirmed that they knew the action to take in the event of any suspicion of abuse. Staff understood the whistle blowing policy and how to use it. They were confident they could raise any concerns with the registered provider or outside agencies if this was needed.

Staff were trained to meet people’s needs and were supported through regular supervision and an annual appraisal to support them to carry out their roles.

Staff respected people in the way they addressed them and helped them to move around the service.

Staff were long serving, friendly and very knowledgeable about mental health matters and the needs and requirements of people using the service. Staff involved people in planning their own care. Staff supported people in making arrangements to meet their health needs. People had access to health services and referrals for additional support were made when people needed it.

Medicines were managed, stored, disposed of and administered safely. People received their medicines in a safe way when they needed them and as prescribed.

People received the support they needed to eat and drink. They had a choice of meals from a varied menu. Mealtimes were a relaxed and pleasant experience for people.

People’s care was planned and delivered in a personalised way. The service had been organised in a way that promoted a personalised approach to people’s activities. People were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment and had been supported to decide how they would like to be occupied, for example social activities and going out. People were given individual support to take part in their preferred hobbies and interests.

There were risk assessments in place for the environment, and for each individual person who received care. Assessments identified people’s specific needs, and showed how risks could be minimised. The risks to individuals, for example in moving safely around the service, had been assessed and action taken to reduce them. Staff understood how to keep people safe. The registered provider had taken action to ensure the premises were safe and met people’s needs.

There were systems in place to review accidents and incidents and make any relevant improvements as a result.

People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. Complaints were responded to quickly and appropriately and people were given feedback in a way they could understand.

One of the owners is also the registered manager. They have maintained their skills and personal development through their membership of a nationally recognised and high profile mental health charity. There were systems in place to obtain people’s views about the quality of the service and the care they received. People were listened to and their views were taken into account in the way the service was run.