Saresta and Serenade

Updated 13 March 2019

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 unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 7 February 2019 and was undertaken by one inspector.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return to help us plan this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We reviewed information we had received about the service such as notifications. This is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also reviewed all other information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority and members of the public.

We met all eight people who used the service. The people using the service had complex needs and did not verbally tell us about their experiences about using the service. To gain an understanding of people’s experiences we observed the interaction between people and staff throughout our inspection. Following our inspection visit to the service, we spoke with two people’s relatives and a health care professional on the telephone.

We looked at records in relation to two people’s care. We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager and two members of care staff. We looked at records relating to the management of the service, two staff recruitment files, training, and systems for monitoring the quality of the service.

Updated 13 March 2019

Saresta and Serenade is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. This service does not provide nursing care. Saresta and Serenade accommodates up to 10 people with complex needs, including learning disability and/or autistic spectrum disorder. Saresta and Serenade were two bungalows next to each other. Four people lived in each, one of the people in Serenade lived in their own adapted self-contained annex.

The care service has 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.

On the day of our comprehensive unannounced inspection on 7 February 2019, there were eight people living in the service.

At our previous inspection of 27 July 2016, this service was rated Good overall. 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. There were systems in place designed to reduce the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. People were supported with their medicines safely. Staff were available to support people when needed and robust systems were in place to recruit staff safely. People were safeguarded by the service’s infection control processes. Where incidents had happened, the service learned from these and used the learning to drive improvement.

People continued to receive an effective service. People were supported by staff who had received training to meet their needs. Staff worked with other professionals involved in people’s care. People had access to health professionals when needed. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and met. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The environment was suitable for the people using the service.

People continued to receive a caring service. People shared positive relationships with staff. People’s privacy, independence and dignity was respected. People’s choices about how they wanted to spend their time and be cared for were valued and listened to.

People continued to receive a responsive service. There were systems to assess, plan and meet people’s individual needs and preferences. People’s had access to social activities to reduce the risks of isolation and boredom. There was a complaints procedure in place and people’s complaints were addressed.

People continued to receive a service which was well-led. The registered manager had a system to assess and monitor the service people received. Where shortfalls were identified actions were taken to improve. People were asked for their views about the service and these were valued and listened to. As a result, the service continued to improve.