Lowther Road

Updated 16 April 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 18 March 2021 and was announced.

Updated 16 April 2021

About the service:

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

Lowther Road accommodates up to four adults with a learning disability in one house. A downstairs bedroom is adapted to suit people with impaired mobility. The service was providing personal care to four working age people at the time of the inspection. Nursing care is not provided.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

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

People’s experience of using this service:

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways: promotion of choice and control, independence and inclusion.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. This included the assessment and management of people’s individual risks.

There was an emphasis on promoting people’s privacy, dignity and independence. People were gently supported to do as much as they were able for themselves.

People were frequently involved in their chosen activities and had community contact as a matter of course. They were encouraged and supported to keep in touch with people who were important to them. A relative told us with pleasure about how busy their loved one was.

The service had a strong and visible person-centred culture, with staff demonstrating real empathy for the people they were supporting. People and relatives valued the caring approach of the manager and staff, which exceeded the expectations of relatives.

People interacted freely with staff, who were skilled at understanding their communication styles and communicating with them in the way they needed.

People got the support they needed, as staff had a good understanding of their support plans. A relative told us how their loved one had thrived at the service. People and their families were meaningfully involved in decisions about their care and support.

People were supported to manage their health, including having a varied and balanced diet of their choice. Medicines were managed safely.

The manager and staff understood their responsibility to protect people from abuse. When circumstances had required it, the manager and staff had followed local safeguarding protocols. There were checks to ensure new staff were of good character and suitable for their role.

The premises were bright and homely, and were kept in a clean and safe condition.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s support needs. Staff had the support they needed, through training and supervision, to perform their roles effectively.

Everyone we spoke with expressed confidence in the way the service was run. There were robust quality assurance arrangements, with a mechanism for bringing about improvements, where necessary, as a result of accidents, incidents or complaints.

The service met the characteristics of outstanding in caring and good in all other areas.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated good (10 August 2016). The overall rating has remained the same.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.