Calvert House

Updated 25 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection team

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Calvert house 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 did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. There was a manager in post who had applied to register.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send to us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with the manager, deputy manager a senior and a support worker. We spoke with two people living in the home. We also spoke with the operations manager and quality lead. We reviewed the care records for three people, the medicines records for three people and staff recruitment records for two staff who had been employed since the last inspection. We reviewed a sample of records relating to team meetings, audits, training and supervision.

Updated 25 September 2019

About the service

Calvert House is a purpose-built residential home providing personal care and support for up to eight people, with acquired brain injury, mental health support needs and learning disabilities. At the time of inspection there were five people living in the home. There were eight self-contained units, people had a bedroom, living area and bathroom. Six units also had a small kitchen area. There was a communal lounge and large kitchen and gardens.

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.

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.

The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.

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

Safeguarding policies and risk management procedures helped protect people from the risk of harm and abuse. Medicines were safely managed stock checks had not been accurate in the past, this had been addressed by the new manager before the inspection. Staff had been recruited safely. Enough staff were on duty. There was a system to ensure safe staffing levels were maintained.

People's needs had been assessed and plans of care developed to meet these. People were supported by staff who had received training and support to fulfil their roles. People's nutritional needs had been met, however menus reviewed showed very repetitive meals with limited nutritional value. This was in the process of being addressed. People had regular access to health professionals with support if they preferred this. People's ability to make decisions had been properly considered and recorded. 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 were supported by kind and caring staff who understood how to support people respectfully. People were supported to maintain and develop their independence. Some people were actively preparing to move in to more independent accommodation in the community.

People received person centred care which was responsive to their needs. Care records included details about people's experiences and lifestyle choices. Staff were respectful of people's choices and had received equality and diversity training. People's care needs were kept under review and updated in response to change. People were supported to engage in activities they valued.

The service had clear values and a commitment to providing high-quality, person-centred care. Staff were clear about their roles and the standards expected of them. Staff felt valued by the management team. Governance systems were in place to monitor the quality of care provided and records maintained. Regular team meetings and partnership working with the wider organisation ensured people were kept informed. People were able to provide their views on the care they received through a variety of formats.

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

Rating at the last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (Published 11 January 2019)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

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.