Strawberry Fields

Updated 29 January 2022

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.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of COVID-19, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice is safe and that services are compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 13 January 2022 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection.

Updated 29 January 2022

About the service:

Strawberry Fields is a residential care home that provides accommodation and personal care for people who have learning disabilities and some associated physical or/and sensory disabilities. There were seven people using the service at the time of inspection.

The service was a large service, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered to support ten people which is larger than best practice guidance. However, the provider had clear plans to amend the size of the service and create a space better suited to people’s needs. This would include two self-contained flats and reducing from ten beds to seven.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿ The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support. This document describes what the Care Quality Commission (CQC) look for to help them decide if they can allow a service that looks after people with learning disabilities, to open. Care homes should ideally be small to allow for more personalised care and part of the local community to promote inclusion. The provider must also be able to demonstrate how they will help people to stay independent and make choices about what they want to do.

¿ There was a new manager in post that was spending time with people on shift to understand their preferences, routines and needs. Although they had only been in post for three weeks, staff, relatives and a professional were already optimistic about this change. The service had had three managers in the last year and concerns had been raised by the local authority about how this lack of continuity was impacting on people and staff. The manager had not yet registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) but was planning to do this. Despite positive feedback, the manager required more time to implement and imbed changes.

¿ People were kept safe and we could see they felt comfortable around staff they knew well. Areas of risk had been identified and assessments told staff what these were and how risks could be managed.

¿ There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and they had been recruited safely. Management had recognised improvement was needed to staff retention and had implemented several new initiatives.

¿ Due to the fact the new manager was spending time on the floor and observing people and needs, they had taken action to ensure incidents didn’t happen again. This was something they planned to continue moving forward.

¿ We saw medicines were given, stored and managed in a safe way.

¿ 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.

¿ Staff had received a variety of personalised training to meet the needs of people, particularly with regard to behaviours that challenged. Staff told us they felt well supported in their roles with regular supervision and team meetings. They felt their induction had given them the skills and knowledge to understand people and their routines, which were important to them.

¿ People’s nutritional and health care needs were met. They had continuous support from health and social care professionals to improve their well-being. This had a positive impact on their lives.

¿ Relatives and a professional told us staff were, “So very caring” and, “Know people extremely well.” We observed relationships had been built between people and staff based on mutual trust and respect. People’s privacy, dignity and independence was important to staff and promoted.

¿ People had their own bespoke activities timetables, based on their interests and preferences. They had choice and control over what they wanted to do each day. Staff regularly reviewed people’s choices and needs to ensure they were happy with the care provided. People also had choice of who they wanted to support them each day.

¿ Although the manager and operations lead were fairly new, they understood the historical concerns related to the service. They told us they were “Determined to turn the service around” and had been working closely with the local authority to address concerns. A peripatetic manager was working closely with the manager to ensure they had full support during their induction. We were told they would remain at Strawberry Fields, “As long as it took for the manager to be confident.”

Rating at last inspection:

At their previous inspection, Strawberry Fields were rated Requires Improvement overall. (Report published 22 June 2018) At this inspection, we found that significant improvements had been made. The service has now improved to Good overall.

Why we inspected:

The inspection was prompted in part by a series of notifications received by the provider regarding people's safety. However, the information shared with CQC indicated potential concerns about the management of risk and people's safety. This included managing incidents between people. This inspection looked at these issues to ensure people's safety.

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.

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