Harry Caplan House

Updated 13 February 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 completed by two inspectors.

Service and service type

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. Registered managers and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. They had been registered since 2010 and at this service for almost three years.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the manager would be in the office to support the inspection and to arrange for some people and staff to be able to talk with us.

What we did before the inspection

Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as safeguarding concerns. We sought feedback from the local authority who work with the service, they had no concerns and provided us with some further positive information.

The provider completed a provider information return. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to carry out our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with six people who used the service, one relative and one visiting professional. We spoke with two support workers, a senior support worker, the short services co-ordinator, three domestic staff, a cook, the assistant manager, the service manager and the registered manager. We reviewed a range of records including three people’s care records and two medication records. A number of other records were reviewed in relation to the management of the service, including quality checks, feedback surveys, meeting minutes and accidents and incidents. We did not look at staff files on this occasion as staff were recruited safely when we previously checked.

Updated 13 February 2020

About the service

Harry Caplan House is a service which provides personal care and support to 18 people living in an extra care scheme. These are primarily older people.

This is a large modern building comprising of 32 flats, eight of which are for short term use. These are people on placement for up to six weeks following discharge from hospital, before returning to live back in their own homes.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

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

A registered manager was in post who was exceptionally passionate about the care provided. Along with the assistant manager they had made a number of changes to improve the service, and this impact was evident in the overwhelmingly positive feedback we received from people living at Harry Caplan House. Staff ensured people were at heart of all decisions made and the care they received.

People and staff had a variety of opportunities to feedback about the running of the service and this was clearly used to make changes to benefit everyone at the service and to drive improvements. People were encouraged and empowered to get involved with fundraising activities to shape the service further and create opportunities to reduce social isolation for people.

Care was based upon good practice guidance to ensure people received an effective service. Substantial investment had been made in staff with training and staff were encouraged to specialise in areas of expertise as champions, so they could support and develop their colleagues further.

The management team showed a strong commitment and took effective action to make sure there was equality and inclusion across the service.

Staff were caring in their approach and had excellent relationships with people. Promoting independence was a core aspect of service and people were supported by staff to improve their daily living skills and confidence.

There were enough staff to ensure people were safe and staff had some time to get to know people well. Where risks associated with people's health and wellbeing had been identified, plans were in place to manage those risks. Staff understood their responsibility to safeguard people from harm and knew how to report concerns.

People received care which was responsive to their individual needs. Care records provided staff with information in relation to people’s backgrounds, interests and individual health needs. Staff knew people well and what made them happy.

Staff encouraged people to maintain a balanced diet. The provider and staff team worked closely with external healthcare professionals to ensure people's health and wellbeing was maintained.

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; systems supported this practice.

Robust quality checks were carried out to monitor the service, and these identified where improvements could be made.

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

Rating at last inspection

The service was rated as Good (published 12 July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.