Archived: Coppull Lane Respite Services

Updated 30 March 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 inspection took place on 6, 7 and 8 of December 2017.

We gave the provider 72 hour's notice of the visit because both the manager and service users are often out during the day. We also considered the potential impact that the inspection might have on people using the service. The people who used the service usually arrived from 3pm and left the next morning. Therefore one of our visits was over tea-time and early evening in order to meet people and observe how they were supported. The service was inspected by one 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 what improvements they plan to make. Prior to the inspection we looked at information contained in the PIR and reviewed all the information we held about the service including statutory notifications, safeguarding referrals and complaints. We also liaised with external stakeholders including the local safeguarding team.

We looked at the home's policies and procedures in relation to safeguarding, whistleblowing, accidents and incidents, Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, recruitment, supervision, training, medication, moving and handling, risk management, infection control and premises safety checks.

We looked in detail at the care records for four people who use the service. We looked at the recruitment files for three members of staff. We interviewed the Team Leader and three other members of staff. We spoke to the relatives of three people who use the service. Due to the complex needs of the people who use the service we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Updated 30 March 2018

This announced inspection took place on 6, 7 and 8 December 2017. We gave the service 72 hours notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in. We also considered the potential impact the inspection might have on some people who used the service. The people who used the service usually arrive from 3pm and left the next morning; because of this one of our visits was over tea-time and early evening in order to meet people and observe how they were supported.

Coppull Lane Respite Services provides respite care for up to five adults with learning disabilities and/or autism. Some people have additional physical disabilities. The service is purpose built with some overhead tracking and adapted facilities. People accessed the service for short breaks, typically 1-3 nights and occasionally for a full week. Some people visited every few weeks and some visited weekly.

This was the first time the service had been inspected since registering at this address under the current provider, Wigan Council on 17 October 2017. The service is registered to provide accommodation for people who need nursing or personal care. There was a registered manager in post. 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.

The service was found to be good in relation to the five questions we ask; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

People accessing the service were safe and protected from harm and abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about the importance of keeping people safe and how to achieve this. There were systems in place to allow staff or relatives to raise any concerns they might have and evidence that the home had responded appropriately. The risks inherent in each person's daily life had been assessed and management plans developed to minimise the potential for harm.

The service demonstrated they used a comprehensive and detailed assessment process to establish individual's needs and how they were to be met. The service worked in partnership with other professionals and families to optimise their knowledge of individuals and provide care that was effective. Staff were skilled at working in person centred ways to ensure people received care that was individually tailored to their needs.

Staff were recruited safely and had received an appropriate induction and on-going training that included regular refreshers. There was also more specific training around individual long term conditions such as autism, epilepsy and restrictive practices. Staff were aware of the importance of consent and their obligations in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff were observed to be caring in their support of people using the service. Staff demonstrated kindness and patience and demonstrated their understanding of the principles of dignity and respect and were observed to uphold these.

The service valued diversity and ensured that people's cultural backgrounds and preferences were included in the assessment and care planning process. The service had supported people to celebrate different festivals including, Diwali and Christmas. People's interests were also reflected in their care plans and they were supported with activities and outings.

The service was well-led and had a clear management structure in place. The team leader oversaw the day to day management of the service with regular support from the registered manager. Staff felt that the management team were approachable and supportive. Relatives of people who accessed the service said they were happy with the management team and felt able to approach them. There were systems in place to ensure the on-going effectiveness and quality of the service provided.