We carried out a review of the data available to us about Southlands on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Southlands, you can give feedback on this service.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
The service 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 with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager at the service. 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.
People received a personalised service which put them at the centre of their care and support. People took charge of the way they wanted to be supported by staff. Support plans contained specific guidance to inform staff how the person wanted to be supported whilst maintaining and increasing their independence. People were treated with kindness by staff who respected their privacy and dignity.
There were arrangements in place to keep people safe and to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Risks assessments were individual to people’s needs and aimed to minimise risk whilst promoting people’s independence. People received their medicines safely. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection where possible. Accidents and incidents were monitored and recorded.
There were enough staff on duty with the right skills to meet people’s needs. Staff received the training and support that they needed to carry out their responsibilities in delivering care and support that was effective and responsive. Recruitment practices were safe and checks were carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who needed care and support.
People’s needs and choice had been assessed prior to and following moving into the service. Care and support was planned with people and their relatives and regularly reviewed to ensure people continued to have the support they needed.
Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 [MCA] and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards [DoLS]. People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported people in the least restrictive way as possible.
People had access to food that they enjoyed and were able to access drinks and snacks throughout the day. People’s nutrition and hydration needs had been assessed and recorded. Staff supported people to meet their specific dietary needs. Staff ensured people remained as healthy as possible with support from health care professionals, if required.
The provider ensured the complaints procedure was made available in an accessible format if people wished to make a complaint. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people. They were a range of checks and audits carried out to ensure the safety and quality of the service that was provided to people.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The inspection was carried out on 28 September 2015 and was unannounced.
The service provided accommodation for people who require personal care. The accommodation was a large detached house providing support to six people with learning disabilities. There were six people living in the service when we inspected.
There was a registered manager employed at the service. 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.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care services. At the time of the inspection, the registered manager had applied for DoLS authorisations for two people living at the service, with the support and advice of the local authority DoLS team.
People’s capacity to consent to the restrictions had not been assessed prior to the DoLS authorisations being completed. We have made a recommendation about this.
People told us they felt safe. Staff had received training about protecting people from abuse, and they knew what action to take if they suspected abuse. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and measures put in place to manage any hazards identified.
People were treated with kindness and respect. People’s needs were assessed before moving into the service with involvement from relatives, health professionals and the person’s funding authority. Care plans contained detailed information and clear guidance about all aspects of a person’s health, social and personal care needs to enable staff to meet people’s needs.
People participated in activities of their choice within the service and local community. There were enough staff to support people to participate in the activities they chose.
People had access to the food that they enjoyed and were able to make their own drinks with the support of staff if required.
People received their medicines safely and when they needed them. Policies and procedures were in place for the safe administration of medicines and staff had been trained to administer medicines safely.
Quality assurance processes were in place to regularly monitor the quality of the service being provided to people.
Recruitment practices were safe and checks were carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who needed care and support. People were involved in the recruitment of their staff.
Staff told us they felt supported by the management team. Staff were trained to meet people’s needs and were supported through regular supervision and an annual appraisal, so they were supported to carry out their roles. People were supported by staff that had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.
During this inspection we set out to answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?
Below is a summary of what we found.
Is the service safe?
People were cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment at the home had been well maintained and serviced regularly. There were enough staff on duty with the appropriate skills and experience to meet the needs of the people living at the home. Staff provided care and support during the day and night. Staff used audio monitoring devices to ascertain if people required assistance at night.
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have been submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff have been trained to understand when an application should be made and how to submit one.
Is the service effective?
People told us that they were happy with the care they received. It was clear from what we saw and from speaking with staff that they understood people's care and support needs and that they knew them well. One person told us "The staff all have experience with supporting people with epilepsy'. Staff had received specialised training to meet the needs of the people living at the home.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers were patient and gave encouragement when supporting people. People told us they were able to make their own choices in their everyday lives. Our observations confirmed this. One person told us 'The staff are very friendly".
Is the service responsive?
People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. It was clear that staff regularly discussed any changes related to people's care with them. Records confirmed people's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided that met their wishes. People had access to activities that were important to them and had been supported to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives. We noted that one person complained of a sore back, and staff offered painkillers and postural advice.
Is the service well-led?
Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. People told us they were asked for their feedback on the service they received and that they had also filled in a quality survey. They confirmed they had been listened to. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff told us that there were regular staff meetings and handovers, and they always felt like they knew what was happening in the home.
Staff demonstrated that they understood the needs and personalities of the people in their care and risk assessments had been made about different aspects of the care provided.
We observed a good rapport and lively banter between people and staff in the home. People we spoke with said: " I really like it here and my key worker is very nice" and " I like it all".
Medications had been stored, managed and administered in a safe and appropriate manner which kept people safe.
We saw that staff working at the home had been subjected to all appropriate checks prior to being employed there. Carers underwent a detailed induction programme and received regular training and supervision.
The provider operated effective systems to assess and monitor the quality of services provided. We saw evidence that peoples views and comments had been acted upon.