We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caedmon House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Caedmon House, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service: People told us they received a good service and felt safe. Risks were well managed. The provider learned from previous accidents and incidents to reduce future risks. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities about safeguarding. Arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines.
There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. Staff were suitably trained and supported in their role. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure, and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff.
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 received planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them. 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’s support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible to gain new skills and become more independent.
People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. They helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.
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 provider had a complaints procedure and people were aware of how to make a complaint. An effective quality assurance process was in place. People and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Good (published November 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection. It was scheduled based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
There was a registered manager employed at this service. 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.
At the last inspection on 11 June 2015, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements around cleanliness and maintenance and we found these actions had been completed. The environment was now maintained safely and steps had been taken to ensure cleanliness.
Staff were recruited safely and there were sufficient numbers to meet people's needs. They had received an induction and been trained in subjects that were relevant to their roles. Staff were supported through supervision and meetings.
Care and support was person centred and there were plans and risk assessments in place which reflected this. There were management plans in place to guide staff when necessary.
People had access to health and social care professionals when needed and we found that people's medicines were managed safely.
People had a choice of what they wished to eat and were able to make snacks and drinks if they wished. They could eat wherever and whenever they chose to.
People’s safety was taken into account by the service because the registered manager had ensured that staff were aware of abuse and how they could recognise and report any events.
The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.People’s consent was sought when appropriate and this was recorded in people's care records. Deprivation of liberty safeguards had been authorised in some cases and these were reviewed in line with current guidance.
Staff were friendly and respectful. They supported people who used the service to undertake a variety of activities within the local community.
The culture of the service was caring and supportive. Where it was necessary people had access to advocacy services.
Staff felt well supported by the registered manager who was visible throughout the service.
There was an effective quality assurance system used at the service. Audits were undertaken of all areas and any actions identified which helped the service to make improvements.
Caedmon House is a residential service providing support for up to nine people with a learning disability or an autistic spectrum disorder. The accommodation is a terraced house in the seaside town of Whitby on the North Yorkshire coast. On the day of our inspection there were nine people living at the service but one person was on holiday.
There was a registered manager employed at this service. 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.
The care and support for people was provided by staff who had been trained and who knew people well. Staff were aware of how to alert the appropriate people if they suspected someone was at risk of harm and there were clear policies and procedures in place for them to follow.
Care plans were person centred and had been reviewed. There were individual risk assessments in place with clear management plans to help support people. Peoples medicines were being managed safely.
People who used the service had access to a variety of activities and educational courses. These had led to work placements for people.
The audits carried out by the service had not identified all areas requiring improvement. Cleanliness was an issue in some areas and in others there were health and safety risks. This was a breach of Regulation 15 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008(Regulated Activities) 2014. You can see what action we asked the provider to take at the back of this report. We also recommended that the service look at good practice guidance around auditing care services.
We found that improvements had been made with regard to the recruitment process. This meant that the provider could be confident that their processes were sufficiently robust to prevent unsuitable people from working with younger people and adults.
We found that the service obtained people's consent before offering care and support. Staff understood that people should be supported to make decisions about their care.
People's care needs were assessed and care plans were drawn up to meet those needs. Risks were assessed and strategies were in place to minimise these. Risk assessments and care plans were kept under regular review. Specialists were consulted so that people had the benefit of expert advice.
People told us they felt safe and were confident that action would be taken in response to any concerns they might have.
The provider had a recruitment procedure in place. However, we found that improvements were needed to the recruitment process to make sure that the provider only employed people suitable for the role.
The service had a system in place to assess and monitor the quality of care and support so that it could plan required improvements.
People who used the service told us "Staff are supportive even when I am kicking out" and "Staff are doing a very good job here". Another person told us "Staff have good manners towards us" and "It is better than my last place." One person who used the service told us they felt safe in the home. Another person told us that the staff helped support them especially when they were experiencing challenging behaviour.
During our inspection we spoke with several health care professionals and they told us that staff worked with them to ensure that people received consistent support. They confirmed that staff consistently provided person-centred care.
Staff were aware of the different types of abuse and said they were confident they would be able to identify the signs of abuse in people who used the service.
People told us that if they had a complaint they would tell a member of staff or the manager. They also told us that there were regular house meetings where they could all discuss any concerns they had. One person said "The staff take time to talk to you and I tell them if I am unhappy" and "Staff talk to you about what you want."