Archived: East View Housing Management Limited - 19 Alexandra Road

About the service

Eastview Housing – 19 Alexandra Road is a residential care home providing personal care to 3 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 3 people. This service supports people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Right Support:

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff did not see people’s risks as barriers and worked with people to do what they chose to. People and staff gave us many examples of where they had achieved their goals with staff support.

People were supported by staff that were safely recruited and trained in areas that were relevant to people’s health conditions and needs. Staff understood their responsibilities around safeguarding and keeping people safe. Medicines were managed safely and where possible people were supported to administer their own medicines.

Right Care:

Staff were kind, caring and treated people with dignity and respect. People received person centred care that was tailored to their individual needs and wants. People received care that supported their needs and aspirations and focused on their quality of life.

People could take part in activities and pursue interests that were tailored to them. Staff gave people opportunities to try new activities that enhanced and enriched their lives. People that wanted to, wrote parts of their care plan with staff and were involved in recording what had happened each day.

Right Culture:

People led inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff. The atmosphere of the home was relaxed and friendly and people were comfortable and happy to live there. People were relaxed and content around staff. Staff spoke about people and their achievements proudly. The management team led by example and were fully focused on supporting people to be as independent as possible and live their best lives.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 21 April 2018).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. We undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

The overall rating for the service has remained good based on the findings of this inspection.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for East View Housing Management Limited - 19 Alexandra Road on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

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. (Registering the Right Support CQC policy)

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going 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.

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.

Although regular quality audits were completed by the registered manager and senior support worker, a number of shortfalls were found within record keeping which suggested current auditing processes needed to be developed. Staff had a thorough knowledge of people and their support needs, which meant where shortfalls were identified, there was limited impact to people. However, support needs were not consistently identified within care documentation. This was an area that the registered manager had already identified as requiring some improvements.

People were safe. Staff had a clear understanding on how to safeguard people and protect their health and well-being. People had a range of individualised risk assessments to keep them safe and to help them maintain their independence. Where risks to people had been identified, risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to ensure peoples safety.

Staff received regular training, supervisions and attended meetings to ensure they were well supported and had the knowledge and skills to support people. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People’s nutritional needs were met and they were given choice and control over what they wanted to eat and drink.

People and relative’s felt that staff were kind and caring. It was evident that staff knew people well and strong relationships had been built. People’s privacy, dignity and independence was promoted at all times and they were encouraged to engage with a variety of social activities of their choice in house and in the community.

Staff knew the people they cared for and what was important to them. Staff appreciated people's life histories and understood how these could influence the way people wanted to be cared for. Each person also had a key-worker; this was a named member of staff who had a central role in their lives and would oversee their support needs and care plans. Care plans were person centred and emphasised involvement from people, their relatives and health professionals.

People and their relative’s felt that they were listened to and were confident complaints were dealt with effectively. People, their relatives and staff were complimentary about the management team and how the service was run.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and staff told us, our observations during the inspection and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People who lived at the service told us that they felt safe and trusted the staff who supported them. One person told us 'I'm happy to live here, I have no concerns at all'.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. We saw that care plans were sufficiently detailed to allow staff to deliver safe and effective care that reflected the support required in people's assessed needs. However, we found that some key worker reports had not been completed and records such as routine monitoring of weight had also lapsed. People told us that staff sometimes spoke with them about their support plans.

Records showed that systems were in place to make sure that staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints and concerns. Records kept by the service ensured that risks were identified and reviewed. This helped reduce risks to people and enabled the service to improve.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care settings. This is when restrictions may have to be made to help keep people safe. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.

Staff files contained all of the information needed by the Health and Social Care Act as well as details of the training they had received. This meant the provider could demonstrate that the staff employed to work at the service were suitable and had the skills and experience needed to support the people who lived there.

Is the service effective?

Staff we spoke with understood people's evident care and support needs well. People told us that they were happy with the care they received, they had no concerns and felt their needs had been met. One person said 'All of the staff are great'. People understood that they had given their consent to receive the care and support provided and knew that they could change their minds about the decisions that they had made.

Is the service caring?

People were treated with respect and staff were courteous. Staff were aware of people's interests, they encouraged people and offered them a wide variety of activities. People told us that the staff were supportive and we saw that interaction between staff and people was polite and often with humour. Staff communicated effectively with people. We saw that this helped to reduce people's anxieties when planning activities and events.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they moved to the service. People we spoke with told us they were happy with the support provided and that it met their preferences, interests and goals. People had access to activities that were important to them. For example, some people had work placements, or went to college and day centres. We found that people had been supported to maintain friendships.

Is the service well-led?

The name of a previous registered manager appears in this report, who was not in post and not managing the regulated activity at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because it had not been removed as the registered manager of this location at the time of our inspection.

Staff had a good understanding of their roles in the service and felt supported by the acting manager. There were quality assurance processes in place to maintain standards in the service. We found the acting manager had good knowledge of the running of the home.

During our visit we met all of the people that lived in the house. We also met two staff who worked across this and two other houses operated by the provider in the same street. People were able to tell us about their experiences and told us they liked where they lived. We found that staff demonstrated an in-depth understanding of people's individual care and support needs.

All the people in the house had a weekly activity programme. We saw them coming and going to activities during our inspection. They told us about the things they liked to do during the day and at evenings and weekends.

We saw that interactions between staff and people living in the house were relaxed and mutually respectful.

We saw that appropriate systems were in place for the safe management of medicines, and for the receipt of and response to complaints.

We found that people lived in a safe, well maintained and homely environment.

We had some concern that a robust recruitment and induction process for new staff was not clearly evidenced and that records were not always kept updated.