Background to this inspection
Updated
19 May 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.
The inspection took place on the 16 and 17 April 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider a short amount of notice that we would be inspecting, because we wanted to ensure a manager was present in the office and we needed to seek consent before visiting people in their homes. On the 16 March 2018, we visited the provider’s offices to look at care related documentation and speak with the manager of the service. On the 16 and 17 April 2018 we visited six homes where people were supported to live. On the 18 and 19 April 2018 we made phone calls to a person who received domiciliary care and two staff who provided this service.
The inspection was carried out by two inspectors. Prior to the inspection we spoke with both the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams. We reviewed information held on the provider for example notifications sent to us by the provider. We reviewed information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. 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.
During the inspection we spoke with 14 people who used the service. We spoke with 13 support workers, the provider, the operations lead, two deputy managers and two service managers. We looked at elements of six people’s care records and records relating to the management of the service including staff training records, audits and meeting minutes. We spoke with two health professionals who work with the service.
Updated
19 May 2018
The inspection took place on 16 and 17 April 2018 and was announced.
At the last inspection in August 2016 we rated the service ‘Requires Improvement.’ This is because we needed to be assured that improvements made following the February 2016 inspection were sustained. At this inspection we found the service had sustained these improvements and further developed the service.
Redburn House provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes with mental health needs. Until March 2018 Redburn House had been registered as a care home, but was now one of 11 supported living settings where staff provided personal care and support. Supported living settings allow people to live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. In addition, the service provides a domiciliary care service to people. Most people received minimal personal care comprising of prompting with washing, showering and continence. At the time of the inspection, 26 people were receiving personal care from the service including the prompting of personal care.
A registered manager was not in place. The provider had made the decision to become the registered manager for the service and submitted an application which was in the process of being assessed by the Commissions registration team. 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.
People said they felt safe using the service. Staff knew how to identify and report any concerns. Risks to people’s health and safety were well managed by the service. Following adverse events, action was taken to improve the safety of the service. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.
There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received a consistent level of care and support. Staff were recruited safely to ensure they were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. Staff received a good level of care and support to enable them to meet people’s individual needs.
People’s nutritional needs were assessed and people were supported to ensure they ate and drank appropriately. The service worked with a range of professionals to help meet people’s healthcare needs.
The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Care was delivered in the least restrictive way possible and people were involved in decisions relating to their care and support.
Staff were kind and caring and treated people well. People spoke positively about the staff that supported them. Staff had developed strong relationships with people and people were cared for by familiar faces. People were encouraged to develop and maintain relationships with other people who used the service. People’s views and opinions were sought and used to make improvements to the way care and support was provided.
People’s care needs were met. Care and support plans were detailed and demonstrated a thorough assessment of people’s needs. We found appropriate care was delivered in line with these plans. People’s care needs were subject to regular review.
People were encouraged to maintain links with the local community and undertake a range of activities.
Complaints were recorded, investigated and responded to in a timely way. People said they were happy with the way the service was provided.
People spoke positively about the way the service was managed. They knew the management team and said they were approachable. There was a person-centred culture within the service focused on improving people’s independence, confidence and life skills.
A range of checks were undertaken by the management team to provide assurance the service was operating effectively. The service was committed to continuous improvement and had improved significantly over recent years.