Charnhill Crescent

33 Charnhill Crescent is a care home registered to provide personal care and accommodation to a maximum of 4 people. The service provides support to people with Mental Health needs. At the time of our inspection, there were 4 people using the service. The service is located in a detached home in a residential area within close proximity to community facilities.

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

People living at the home told us they were happy with the care provided and that the staff were nice. The staff knew people well and were enthusiastic about providing person-centred care.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities in safeguarding people from abuse. Risks were managed and health and safety checks in the home had been carried out. The home was clean and maintained well.

Care records were person-centred, reviewed regularly, and updated when people's needs changed. People took part in a range of activities both in the home and in the wider community. People were supported to keep in regular contact with their relatives.

There were enough staff to meet people's individual needs and staff received the induction, training and support they needed to conduct their roles.

There were good systems of quality assurance checks and audits. Everyone was positive about the registered manager and the way the service was run. The provider had notified the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of significant events, such as safeguarding incidents.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and acted in their best interests. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

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

The last rating for this service was good (published 16 March 2018).

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding. We looked at the key questions on whether the service was safe and well-led. 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 continued to be rated as good based on the findings of this inspection.

Follow up

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

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good:

People were encouraged and supported to lead active lifestyles in their home and the local community. People were encouraged to be independent in all aspects of their daily living. This included looking after their own medicines if they had been assessed as safe to do so, managing their own finances, planning, and cooking their own meals. People were given a weekly budget to enable them to purchase their own food. Some people were working towards living more independently.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because there were clear procedures in place to recognise and respond to abuse and staff had been trained in how to follow the procedures. Systems were in place to ensure people were safe including risk management, checks on the environment and safe recruitment processes.

Sufficient staff supported the people living at the service. There were occasions during the day when there were no staff present in the home. This was kept under review ensuring people were safe and not at risk. People told us they enjoyed the opportunities of being on their own without staff support. This was time specific for a period of two hours. When new people moved to the home this would be reviewed to ensure it continued to be safe.

Care was effective and responsive to people’s changing needs. Information was available to enable the staff to recognise any relapses in people’s physical or mental health and guidance on what action should be taken to support the person. People were involved in making decisions on how they wanted to be supported.

People’s views were sought through care reviews and house meetings and these were acted upon. Systems were in place to ensure complaints were responded to.

Staff were knowledgeable about the people they were supporting. Staff had received appropriate training to support people effectively. There was a strong commitment to providing care that was tailored to the person. Staff worked as a team to deliver care. Systems were in place to ensure open communication including team meetings and daily handovers. A handover is where important information is shared between the staff during shift changeovers. This ensured important information was shared between staff enabling them to provide care that was effective and consistent.

People were provided with a safe, effective, caring and responsive service that was well led. The organisation’s values and philosophy were clearly explained to staff. There was a positive culture where people felt included and their views were sought. The quality of the service was reviewed with action plans developed to enhance the service.

We carried out this visit to check on the care and welfare of people using this service. The visit was unannounced which meant the provider and the staff did not know we were coming.

Two people were in residence when we visited. One person was staying with a relative for the weekend. One member of staff was on duty.

We saw that care and support records provided clear information to staff about how to meet the needs of the individuals who used the service.

We saw that people had a choice of food each day. We saw staff supporting people who needed help to eat their meals.

We found that that people lived in a home which was clean, this was because the provider had procedures in place to reduce the risk of infection.

We found effective systems were in place for storing, recording and handling medicines.

Clear records were in place to outline the support needs of the people living at 33 Charnhill. Records were detailed, contained accurate information and kept under review.

People told us they were happy living at 33 Charnhill Crescent, they told us that they felt well supported by staff to access their community, examples were given such as going to work and accessing leisure and social activities. On the day of our visit one person was visiting family and another person was on their way to their job.

People told us they were involved in planning of their care. This included meeting with their key worker that were involved in their care. People told us they had access to their plans of care and the staff showed them what was documented. People sign to say they agree with the discussions at the key worker meeting.

Records about support provided to people had been well written, involved the person and had been kept under review and updated where required.

The home had been well maintained, was homely and comfortable for the people that lived there.

Staff were knowledgeable about the needs and wishes of people in their care, staff. We saw that staff had been employed in line with the recruitment policies and procedure of the provider.

Complaints are handled and responded to effectively, people know how to make a complaint if they had any concerns.