Beck House

Updated 13 April 2018

This inspection took place on 7 March 2018 and was unannounced. One inspector carried out the inspection.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service in order to plan for our inspection. This included the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally required to let the Commission know about.

We used information the provider sent us in the 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.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. Many people were not able to tell us their views of the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with the 6 people who lived at the home.

We interviewed three members of staff and the registered manager. We spoke to the registered manager and a senior manager. We received email feedback from five relatives and two healthcare professionals.

We pathway tracked the care of three people. We saw care and support in communal areas, spoke with people in private. We also looked at records that related to how the home was being run as well as the quality monitoring systems in place.

Updated 13 April 2018

Beck House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 23 younger adults with a learning disability, autistic spectrum disorder and associated complex needs. There were 18 people at the home on the day of our visit.

There was a registered manager for the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like 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.

The care service was 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 with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. The service was homely and intimate and therefore allowed more personalised support. Its location also supported these principles by being close to shops, other amenities and public transport links that reduced risks of social isolation and strengthened links with the local community.

People, relatives and health professionals commented very positively about the caring ways that staff supported people at Beck House. We saw this through observations of people and staff together. We also saw this in the clear positive outcomes for the people at the home. Relative’s told us how their relatives was always very happy to come back to Beck house and was always greeted with warmth and kindness by the staff.

We saw how staff were very compassionate, kind and sensitive. Staff had built up warm relationships with the people they supported. People were seen to be very relaxed in the presence of staff. Relatives and professionals confirmed staff looked after people to a very high standard.

People were supported with their needs by a staff team who were skilled at understanding each person's needs and aspirations. The team had a really good understanding of each person’s complex learning disabilities and certain people’s sensory impairments. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible in all areas of their life. This was through positive engagement with them. Information was available in each person's preferred format including policies and procedures such as activity programmes and complaints.

People received a service that was flexible and adapted to their changing needs and wishes. This enabled people to have positive outcomes in their daily living. People felt a part of their community, and valued living a meaningful life both in and away from Beck House. Each person had their own very flexible timetable of activities. These were reflective of people’s hobbies and interests. They also included goals that people could achieve. People were well supported to develop confidence and social skills by interacting with peers regularly. People were also supported by staff to plan trips to visit relatives that did not live locally and to go to places and venues further afield and abroad.

The registered manager and provider were highly praised for their support. People, staff and relatives felt they were extremely open and approachable. Staff felt part of an open and empowering culture where they were respected as individuals and as part of a team. Relatives had very positive views of management. They said they always felt welcomed and kept up to date with how people were.

There was a clear person-centred culture that was fully embraced by the staff team. The staff were delivering a consistent approach and were encouraged to support people to try new things and to make positive changes in their lives. The provider, the registered manager and staff team all had a very strong understanding of positive risk taking. There were positive behaviour support plans in place. These helped ensure that staff supported people to stay safe and still develop to their full potential.

The provider, registered manager and staff promoted a positive, inclusive and open culture, this approach has a positive impact on the quality of the service people received. The structure of the service had been reviewed and adjusted so that teams worked in two much smaller groups. This had led to people getting to know the staff who supported them even better and building up even closer relationships with them .It had also helped ensure that senior staff were always available to support staff and people when needed. The service worked closely with other organisations to improve care for people with a learning disability. There were robust quality assurance systems in place to monitor the service. These identified potential areas for improvement, and actions were taken to improve these.

The provider had developed and improved the quality monitoring systems. These helped ensure that the service was safe and of a high standard. Quality audit systems were in use and up to date. There were checks that were regularly carried out by both the provider and registered manager. Feedback was sought from people, staff and relatives. This information was reviewed and actions taken when needed, to improve the service even more. The provider worked in partnership with other organisations. They showed how they took part in good practice initiatives. These were aimed at further developing the service. People and staff had regular meetings where they were given updates on the service and the opportunity to voice any concerns. The registered manager looked for ways to continually improve the quality of the service.