Archived: Churchview Also known as Liberare

Churchview is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to eight people with a learning disability. There were five people living there at the time of this inspection. Some of the people had limited verbal communication skills. We therefore relied on our observations of interactions with staff during our inspection, in addition to our conversations with people and their visitors, to help us reach our judgements on the service.

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.

There was a warm, friendly and welcoming atmosphere in the home. Everyone was smiling and relaxed. The house was clean, well maintained and attractively furnished and people demonstrated a pride in their surroundings. The provider made sure all equipment was safe. A relative told us “It’s always clean. (Person’s name) is very lucky to be here.” Each person had their own bedroom that had been decorated and personalised to suit their individual tastes and preferences.

People were protected from harm and abuse by staff who had been carefully recruited and well trained. One person told us, “I like living here.” A relative told us “No worries at all. If I have any worries I would talk to [registered manager’s name]”. There was a stable, happy and positive staff team. Many of the staff had worked in the home for a number of years and knew each person well. Sufficient staff were employed to meet each person’s needs fully. Comments from staff included, “I would like to say that working here is a pleasure. The standard of care that I came into is in my opinion very high and is exactly what these service users deserve. We are a very strong team who all work together to give the best possible support to all the residents in the house.”

People were supported by staff who understood their health needs. Staff had worked closely with local health and social care professionals to ensure people received appropriate treatment and advice. Staff followed advice appropriately. Staff followed safe procedures for the storage and administration of medicines and made sure people received their medicines in accordance with the instructions of the prescriber. Care plans contained detailed information about each person’s health needs, any risks associated with their health and daily lives, and information to staff on how to support people to minimise those risks where possible.

People were offered a healthy and balanced range of home cooked meals to suit each person’s dietary needs and preferences. A person told us the food was, “Alright. It’s nice.” A relative told us, “It’s all home cooking. It’s very good.”

The staff were kind and caring and understood each person’s needs fully. A person told us “I like all the staff. They are all kind to me.” A relative told us “The staff are excellent. All caring.”

People had been involved and consulted about every aspect of their daily lives and routines in the home. They had been involved in drawing up and reviewing a plan of their care needs. Residents meetings were held in the home every week when they were consulted about menus, outings and other aspects of daily life in the home. Their views were also sought through regular questionnaires. Families and friends were also involved and consulted.

People led active lives. Each care plan contained information about the person’s normal daily routine, and about the weekly activities they participated in. During our inspection two people were out during the day at a local day centre. Other people also went out each week to day centres and clubs. People regularly went out on group and individual outings, and went on holiday each year.

People told us the home was well-led, for example one person said, “I like [registered manager’s name]. They’re wonderful.” A relative told us, “It’s very well run. Very well managed. The residents are so happy here. If there is any problem [registered manager’s name] will sort it out”. The registered manager and provider had effective systems in place to monitor and improve the service. They carried out checks and audits on all aspects of the daily routines in the home.

Two others who lived at the home were out for the day. Three of the people had lived at the home for many years. The people we met with had difficulty in communicating verbally, but they both had their own way of communicating and were involved with the inspection throughout the day. One person introduced us to the home's cat, indicating how they liked to be stroked.

We also met and spoke with the manager of the home another member of staff. Staff told us they worked 'as a close team' and were supported well by the manager and provider.

People knew the staff well and were able to identify staff from photographs on the notice board. People were relaxed and at ease. They were able to make clear to us that they liked the home and were happy in their surroundings. Both people we spoke with told us they 'liked' living at the home. Staff were seen to be caring and responsive in their interaction with people.

Staff described how they encouraged and supported people to be as independent as possible and how they took account of preference and individual interests. We saw that people enjoyed and took part in local activities.

Staff were able to recognise where a person's needs had changed. They responded quickly to make alternative arrangements for people's care which ensured appropriate care and treatment was provided in a safe environment. Changes in the circumstances of people were managed professionally by staff.

There were clear procedures in place for the safe administration, preparation and monitoring of medication. Medication was regularly reviewed to ensure medicines were appropriate and person centred. People could be confident that the system in place for medications was safe.

We found that staff were recruited through a thorough recruitment and selection process and followed induction training before working unsupervised.

We also spoke with the provider who told us there was a quality audit system in place which was checked by them each week. Quality questionnaires were regularly sent to family members and to professionals for purposes of monitoring the quality of the service.

We were cognisant and observed that there were close links and cooperation between the home and local professionals.