Rockingham House

Updated 13 December 2018

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.

Inspection team: The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type: Rockingham House 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.

The care 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.

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:

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be there.

Inspection site visit activity started on 3 December 2018 and ended on 3 December 2018.

What we did:

We reviewed information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We also considered the last inspection report and information that had been sent to us by other agencies. We also contacted commissioners who had a contract with the service.

There were two people at the service on the day of our visit. They were unable to engage in conversation with us about their care so we spoke with three relatives and an advocate for one person living at the service. We had discussions with four staff members that included the registered manager, two senior staff members and a care and support worker.

We looked at the support plans of two people who used the service, we undertook a tour of the premises and observed information on display around the service such as information about safeguarding and how to make a complaint. We also examined records in relation to the management of the service such as staff recruitment files, quality assurance checks, staff training and supervision records, safe guarding information and accidents and incident information.

Updated 13 December 2018

What life is like for people using this service:

People continued to receive safe care. Staff had been provided with safeguarding training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report them. There were detailed risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety. Staffing numbers were sufficient to keep people safe and the registered provider followed thorough recruitment procedures to ensure staff employed were suitable for their role.

People’s medicines were managed safely and in line with best practice guidelines. Systems were in place to ensure that people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt and these were shared with the staff team to reduce further reoccurrence.

People’s needs and choices were assessed and their care provided in line with their preferences. Staff received an induction process when they first commenced work at the service and received on-going training to ensure they could provide care based on current practice when supporting people. People received enough to eat and drink and were supported to use and access a variety of other services and social care professionals. People were supported to access health appointments when required, including opticians and doctors, to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.

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. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People continued to receive care from staff who were kind and caring. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided and their privacy and dignity were protected and promoted. People had developed positive relationships with staff who had a good understanding of their needs and preferences.

People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person and or their relative where required. Staff promoted and respected people's cultural diversity and lifestyle choices. Care plans were personalised and provided staff with guidance about how to support people and respect their wishes. Information was made available in accessible formats to help people understand the care and support agreed.

The service continued to be well managed. People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive improvement. Staff felt well-supported and received supervision that gave them an opportunity to share ideas, and exchange information. Effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided through a range of internal checks and audits. The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to the CQC and external agencies.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

Rating at last comprehensive inspection: Good (report published 13/12/2016)

About the service: Rockingham House provides accommodation and personal care for up to four adults. People living at the service have complex needs that include Autism spectrum disorder, learning and physical disabilities. At the time of our visit there were four people using the service.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.