Stonepit Close

Updated 19 February 2021

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.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by two inspectors.

Service and service type

Stonepit Close is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. 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 reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with three people who used the service and seven members of staff including the registered manager, deputy manager, area manager, senior care workers and care workers.

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

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with four relatives about their experience of the care provided.

Updated 19 February 2021

About the service

Stonepit Close provides personal care for up to 10 adults. At the time of the inspection, there were 10 people receiving a service. The service is spread across two houses, Holly House and Jan Norton House. The houses have separate entrances and facilities but are connected by a large communal area containing an office. No person who used the service had contracted COVID-19. The service had a robust testing regime, which included people and staff doing two lateral flow tests per week, as well as a weekly PCR test in line with government guidance.

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

Family members told us their relative was safe. Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people from harm. Risks to people were assessed and identified. There was guidance for staff on how to manage these risks safely. There was a process to identify learning from accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment practices were in place. Medicines were safely managed.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs and preferences. They had received specialised training, regular supervision and attended team meetings to ensure they were confident in their roles. People's nutritional and hydrational needs continued to be met and they were supported by health and social care professionals as required.

Family members and staff told us the registered manager promoted an open culture of communication and staff confirmed they felt well supported. The provider used effective systems of quality assurance and governance which improved people’s experience of care. The building was checked through regular audits as well as regular health and safety checks by staff and external professionals.

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's views were continually sought, and they were encouraged to be as independent as possible and to be involved in decisions about their care.

Quality assurance processes were robust to give oversight of the service. The registered manager and team leader had ideas of how to continuously improve people's lives and valued working in partnership with others to achieve this.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right support, right care, right culture is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

Right support:

• Stonepit Close offers accommodation to 10 people with learning disabilities and autism. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the home is spread between two separate side by side houses, which are similar to other privately owned homes in the area and there were no identifying signs to indicate it was a care home. The care home is located within walking distance of local shops and amenities. Staff were observed to enable people to make day to day choices, including around food and activities and to access the community. The provider engaged with local commissioning partnerships in order to strive for continuous improvement.

Right care:

• Staff understood people’s specific care needs and preferences and supported people in a person centred way. We saw that people’s dignity was respected and any personal care required was done so discretely and the person’s dignity was not compromised. Staff enabled people to make choices about how they wished to be supported in any given activity. People had been supported to personalise their own rooms and communal areas.

Right culture:

• The leadership team and staff showed commitment to those whom they supported. They spoke with passion and knowledge about their role, central to which was to empower those whom they supported to live their best life possible. Staff told us they viewed themselves as visitors to the home and as such, the needs and views of those whom they supported were paramount and must be respected at all times. We observed that people moved around their home with confidence and placed trust in the staff team to support them safely and in the least restrictive way.

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

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 27 August 2019) and there were two breaches of regulation. We served requirement notices for Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 and Regulation 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014.

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 27 August 2019. Breaches of legal requirements were found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve safe care and treatment and good governance.

We undertook this focused inspection to check the provider had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the key questions of Safe, Effective and Well-led which contain those requirements.

The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Stonepit Close on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.