Hunsbury House

Updated 5 January 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 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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 6 and 8 November 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because Hunsbury House is a small service and we needed to be sure staff and people living at the home would be in.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection the provider completed 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.

During this inspection we spoke with three people using the service. We spoke with three members of care staff, an occupational therapist, a therapy assistant, the registered manager, the clinical nurse manager and the general manager. We observed general interactions between people who used the service and staff.

We reviewed the clinical case notes in relation to the care of the four people. These included their care plans, health, medication, risk assessments and daily care records. We also looked at three staff recruitment records and other records relating to the management of the service, such as staff training and supervision records, quality audits and feedback from people using the service and stakeholders.

Updated 5 January 2018

Hunsbury House provides care and rehabilitation for up to five male adults with acquired brain injuries. The service is situated in a residential estate in Northampton. At the time of the inspection four male adults were using the service.

At the last inspection in November 2015, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection on 6 and 8 November 2017 we found the service remained Good.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People continued to feel safe. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities to safeguard people from the risk of harm and risks to people were assessed and monitored regularly. The premises were appropriately maintained to support people to stay safe. Staff understood how to prevent and manage behaviours that challenged the service. .

Staffing levels ensured people's care and support needs were safely met and safe recruitment processes were in place. Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. Systems were in place to ensure the premises were kept clean and hygienic so people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. There were arrangements in place to make sure action was taken and lessons learned when things went wrong, to improve safety across the service

People’s needs and choices were assessed and their care provided in line with up to date guidance and best practice. They received care from staff that had received training and support to carry out their roles. People were encouraged to prepare their own meals and make healthy choices to maintain their health and well-being. Staff supported people to book and attend appointments with healthcare professionals, and supported them to maintain a healthy lifestyle. The service worked with other organisations to ensure that people received coordinated and person-centred care and support.

People’s diverse needs were met by the adaptation, design and decoration of premises and they were involved in decisions about the environment. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and they gained people's consent before providing personal care.

Staff were caring and compassionate and meaningful relationships had developed between people and staff. People were treated with dignity and respect and staff ensured their privacy was maintained. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided. Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and preferences.

People were listened to, their views were acknowledged and acted upon and care and support was delivered in the way people chose and preferred. Care plans were person centred and reflected how people’s needs were to be met. Records showed people and their relatives were involved in the assessment process and the on-going reviews of their care. They were supported to take part in activities which they wanted to do, within the service and the local community. There was a complaints procedure in place to enable people to raise complaints about the service.

The service had an open culture which encouraged communication and learning. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive continuous improvement. Staff were motivated to perform their roles and worked to empower people to be as independent as possible. The provider had quality assurance systems to review the quality of the service to help drive improvement.