Housing 21 - Oak House

Updated 1 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 carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

This service provides care and support to people living in 36 ‘supported living’ flats, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

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

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. 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 information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with five people who used the service and two relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the regional manager, registered manager and care staff.

We reviewed a range of records. This included five people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

Updated 1 February 2020

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

The service went above and beyond to ensure people were supported to live their lives as fully and independently as possible. It was clear staff made a positive impact on people's lives and the culture of the staff team and management was exceptionally caring. People who use the service, their relatives and healthcare professionals all agreed the service provided to people was exceptional.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff to meet the needs of people living at Housing 21 – Oak House. Whilst people had a set schedule of when carers would visit to support them, they benefitted from being able to call for staff assistance if they needed it amytime over 24 hours. People said staff were responsive to their needs even where this was outside of their scheduled care hours.

People told us the staff were kind and caring. There was an evident culture of kindness in the service which was promoted by the senior leadership team, the management team and care staff who went over and above to enhance people’s lives.

The management team and care staff recognised the importance of protecting people they cared for from the risks of social isolation and boredom, even where providing social support wasn’t part of their agreed care plan. Staff went over and beyond to ensure people remained engaged and were not lonely, giving up their own time to visit people which made them feel valued.

People who required support to maintain good nutrition and hydration told us they received the support they needed.

Information about people’s preferences in coming to the end of their life were documented. The service worked well with other agencies to ensure people had a comfortable, pain free death and could remain in their own home as per their wishes.

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. People told us staff were respectful, asked for their consent and gave them the privacy they wished for.

People were supported and enabled to be independent. The service had provided support to people in a way which meant that they were eventually able to reduce the amount of support staff needed to provide so they could live a more independent life.

Where required, people were supported to make appointments with other healthcare professionals and attend appointments. Staff went over and beyond to accompany people to appointments when relatives were unable to do so. This reduced anxiety for some people.

People were actively involved in the planning of their care and the way they wanted this delivered. People had access to several methods of giving feedback on the service they received. People’s feedback was acted on.

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