Neptune House

Updated 14 September 2018

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 8 August 2018, the inspection was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. The expert by experience had an understanding of caring for people with learning disabilities.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information we held about the service including previous inspection reports. We looked at notifications which had been submitted. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

We observed care in communal areas. We spoke with six people about their experience of the service. We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager, a senior member of staff, and two care staff.

We looked at records held by the provider and care records held in the service. This included three care plans, daily notes; a range of the providers policies including safeguarding and health and safety; the staff handbook; the recruitment records of two new staff; the training records for all the staff and quality audits.

Updated 14 September 2018

This unannounced inspection was carried out on 8 August 2018.

At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) comprehensive inspection in January 2016, this service had an overall rating of Good.

At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the 'all reports' link for Neptune House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Neptune 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. Neptune House provides support for up to 15 people who have a learning disability and/or Autism. There were 13 people living at the service and two other people who spend part of the week at the service to give their carers respite.

There was a registered manager who was also a part owner at the home. 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.

Feedback provided by people about their experiences of the service included, “I know all the staff here. I feel safe. I talk to the manager if I have a problem”, The staff treat me kindly. It is a very nice home. The staff say that we live like a happy family here” and “I have no problems here. There is nowhere else better than this home. Sometimes I get worried and the staff help me get my worries off my mind. They talk about other things with me and that helps me”.

Staff were compassionate, kind and caring and had developed good relationships with people using the service. Staff were aware of how to respect people’s privacy and dignity. People were comfortable in the presence of staff. People were provided with the care, support and equipment they needed to stay independent.

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 support this practice. We observed staff were welcoming and friendly. Staff provided friendly, compassionate care and support. People’s health and wellbeing was supported by prompt referrals and access to medical care.

People continued to be encouraged and supported to pursue activities inside and outside of the home. Staff made people aware of what was happening in the local community, such as festivals that they may wish to attend. People were also encouraged to keep active and continue learning.

Staff had an excellent understanding of people's needs and were imaginative in the way they provided person centred care which put people at the heart of the service. They continued to find creative ways of supporting people to have a good quality of life. Leaders in the service promoted person centred values. Staff were well informed about their roles and they described in detail how they provided support to new staff so that they understood the core values and how to care for people.

Health action plans were in place and people had their physical and mental health needs regularly monitored. Regular reviews were held and people were supported to attend appointments with various health and social care professionals. This ensured they received treatment and support as required.

There were policies and a procedure in place for the safe administration of medicines. Incidents and accidents were recorded and checked by the management team to see what steps could be taken to prevent incidents happening again. There was an up to date procedure covering the actions to be taken in emergency situations.

Safe recruitment practices were consistency followed. Policies were kept updated. Staff were consistently deployed in sufficient numbers to meet the needs of the people currently living at Neptune House. People’s care was delivered safely and staff understood their responsibilities to protect people who were vulnerable. The registered manager followed the safeguarding policies of the local authority.

Training continued for all staff and included supervision and appraisal. Risks assessments continued to be updated and in place for the environment, and for each individual person who received care. The registered manager continued involving people and significant others in planning their care.

The directors of the company, the registered manager and staff continued to find ways to improve the service and remain driven by their passion for caring and supporting people. The vision and the value of the service to ‘enable people to live as they choose’ remained embedded in the service.

The registered manager continued asking people for their feedback about their experiences of care. The results consistently showed that people rated the service as ‘very good’ or ‘outstanding’. People said that they knew they could contact the registered manager at any time, and they felt confident about raising any concerns or other issues.

The provider and the registered manager consistently monitored the quality of the service and made changes to improve the service, taking account of people’s needs and views. The registered manager had provided good leadership to staff. The provider and registered manager implemented plans to improve the service.