We carried out this inspection on the 17 November 2015, and it was unannounced. Aspley House is a privately owned care home, providing personal care and accommodation for two adults with learning disabilities. There were two people living at the service at the time of the inspection. People had complex needs, including mental health and physical health needs. Aspley House and the registered service at 201 London Road work together as one. The services are across the road from each other. The registered manager and staff work at both services and the main office of the two services is at Aspley House. Aspley House is one of a group of five care homes owned by Insight Specialist Behavioural Service Limited.
People had a limited ability to verbally communicate with us or engage directly in the inspection process. People demonstrated that they were happy in their home by showing warmth to the staff that were supporting them. Staff were attentive and communicated with people in a warm and friendly manner. Staff were available throughout the day, and responded quickly to people’s requests for care and support. We observed staff supporting people with their daily activities.
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. The registered manager is registered as the manager of both Aspley House and 201 London Road.
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).
Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests. Staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and showed they understood and promoted people’s rights through asking for people’s consent before they carried out care tasks.
Staff had been trained in how to protect people from abuse, and discussions with them confirmed that they knew the action to take in the event of any suspicion of, or actual abuse. Staff understood the whistle blowing policy and how to use it. They were confident they could raise any concerns with the registered manager or outside agencies if this was needed.
Clear guidelines were in place for staff to follow in order to support people with behaviours that may challenge. Staff demonstrated that they understood these guidelines and put them into practice to help minimise people’s anxieties and behaviours.
Staff were knowledgeable about the needs and requirements of people using the service. Staff involved people in planning their own care in formats that they were able to understand, for example pictorial formats. Staff supported people with making arrangements to meet their health needs.
Staff were recruited using procedures designed to protect people from the employment of unsuitable staff. Staff were trained to meet people’s needs and were supported through regular supervision and an annual appraisal so they were supported to carry out their roles.
Medicines were managed, stored, disposed of and administered safely. People received their medicines when they needed them and as prescribed.
People were provided with food and fluids that met their needs and preferences. Menus offered variety and choice.
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. People were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.
There were systems in place to review accidents and incidents and make any relevant improvements as a result.
The registered manager investigated and responded to people’s complaints and people said they felt able to raise any concerns with staff.
Staff respected people and we saw several instances of a kindly touch or a joke and conversation as lunch was being made and at other times during the day.
People were given individual support to take part in their preferred hobbies and interests.
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.