Jonathan House

Updated 12 March 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Jonathan House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

Before the inspection we reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included notifications. Notifications describe events that happen in the service that the provider is legally required to tell us about. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This helps to support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

During the inspection with spoke with three people about their experiences. We spoke with three members of staff, as well as the registered manager and nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and medication records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures, audits and health and safety documents were also reviewed.

We considered this information to help us to make a judgement about the service.

After the inspection

After the inspection we spoke with the family of three people who used the service and two professionals who visited the service. Their comments have been incorporated into this report.

Updated 12 March 2020

About the service

Jonathan House is a care home providing accommodation and personal care to a maximum of seven people who have learning disabilities, autistic spectrum conditions or additional needs. At the time of the inspection seven people were receiving care and support at the service.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

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

At the last inspection, some improvements were required to meet infection control requirements. At this inspection, the provider had carried out extensive building work and now met all safety and infection control requirements.

The service was exceptionally responsive because support was tailored to meet the needs of individuals and delivered to ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care. Staff always supported people to feel in control of their lives and respected people’s choices.

People and their relatives used a range of methods to provide very regular feedback. They felt their concerns were listened to and appropriate responses received. Technology and alternative methods of communication enabled people to access information in the way they preferred and understood.

People were very actively supported to follow their interests and take part in a wide range of meaningful activities within the service and the community. These reflected their preferences, social and cultural needs and improved their confidence and self-esteem. People accessed a variety of opportunities and lived as full a life as they wished. Staff understood the importance of people taking part in socially and culturally relevant activities and were extremely flexible in supporting people.

People were safe and protected from avoidable harm or abuse. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. The service had systems in place to keep people safe and where risks had been identified, actions were taken to manage risks where possible. Staff supported people to manage their medicines safely.

People were supported by regular staff who knew them well. Staff were safely recruited and received training which equipped them to effectively carry out the requirements of their job. Staff felt supported and received regular supervision.

Care plans were personal, detailed and regularly reviewed. These reflected people’s assessed needs and gave staff guidance about what people could do for themselves and how best to provide 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.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

People’s healthcare needs were identified, and routine and specialist healthcare services were regularly accessed. Staff worked with other agencies and professionals to ensure people received effective care which met their needs. People were encouraged to have a balanced diet in order to remain healthy.

People were supported by caring and compassionate staff who treated them with dignity and respect. All the feedback we received about the service, staff and the registered manager was positive.

The registered manager was keen to continually improve and develop the service. Governance systems were in place to monitor quality and performance and actions were taken when shortfalls were identified.

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 14 August 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.