Cherre Residential Care

Updated 13 March 2019

The inspection:

• We carried out our inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. Our inspection checked whether the provider was 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.

Inspection team:

• Our inspection was completed by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Our expert-by-experience was familiar with the care of people with learning disabilities and autism.

Service and service type:

• Cherre Residential Care is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement.

• CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

• Cherre Residential Care 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 living with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

• The service is required to have 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. At the time of our inspection, a manager was registered with us.

Notice of inspection:

• Our inspection was unannounced.

• The inspection site visit occurred on 28 January 2019.

What we did:

• Our inspection was informed by evidence we already held about the service. We also checked for feedback we received from members of the public, local authorities and clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). We checked records held by Companies House and the Food Standards Agency.

• We asked the service to complete a 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 our inspection visit, we spoke with six people living in the service, three relatives, the provider, the acting manager and two staff members. Due to communication difficulties, we were not able to speak with other people living in the service. Instead, we observed relationships between people and staff. We saw how staff members supported people throughout the inspection to help us understand peoples’ experiences of living in the home.

• We reviewed two people’s care records, two staff personnel files, seven medicines administration records and other records relating to the management of the service.

• We asked the provider to send us further information after our inspection. This was received and used as evidence for our ratings.

Updated 13 March 2019

About the service:

• The service is in a residential area of Leicester.

• The service provides accommodation and personal care to people with learning disabilities and autism. The care home can accommodate 14 people in one building. At the time of our inspection there were 11 people using the service.

People's experience of using this service:

• The service was safe. There was an issue with infection control. This was followed up by the registered manager.

• There was not a fully homely atmosphere for people as parts of the premises were cold.

• Questionnaires had been supplied to people and their representatives for their views of the service. These were generally positive about people’s satisfaction with the service. However, action plans were not in place to show how any issues raised had been dealt with.

• Audit processes were in place but they had not comprehensively ensured quality care as they had not identified issues of concern.

• People and relatives told us that people liked living at the service.

• People were protected against abuse, neglect and discrimination. Staff members were aware of ensuring people's individual safety risks and acting to prevent harm coming to them.

• Staff members knew people well and people appeared to enjoy the attention from staff.

• People were assisted to have choice and control of their lives.

• People and their representatives had a say in how the service was operated and managed.

• People's care was personalised to meet their individual needs.

• A registered manager was in place to ensure governance of the service.

• The service met the characteristics for a rating of "good" in caring and responsive but not safe, effective and well led where the rating was Requires Improvement.

• More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

• At our last inspection, the service was rated "good". Our last report was published for the inspection of 3 August 2016.

Why we inspected:

• This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

Follow up:

• We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people received safe, high quality care. Further inspections will be planned for future dates.