Ecclesbourne Lodge

Updated 22 January 2019

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: This inspection was completed by one inspector.

Service and service type: People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care service and 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. Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

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 This inspection was unannounced.

What we did:

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as potential safeguarding concerns; and we sought feedback from the local authority, clinical commissioning group (CCG) and other professionals who work with the service. We assessed the information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. However, the provider had completed this ten months ago and we therefore gave opportunities for them to update us throughout the inspection. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with one person. Other people using the service found verbal communication more difficult, we also observed the interaction between people and the staff who supported them in communal areas throughout the inspection visit. We spoke with seven members of support workers, the team manager, the administration support person and the registered manager. The regional manager and the provider’s quality lead manager were present for the feedback at the end of the inspection. After the inspection we contacted three relatives by telephone and two social care professionals.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records and medicine records. We also looked at two staff files around staff recruitment. Various records in relation to training and supervision of staff, records relating to the management of the home and a variety of policies and procedures developed and implemented by the provider.

After the inspection the registered manager sent us further information in relation to, the supervision process, the provider’s quality checks and audit process and their end of life paperwork. We have reviewed these as part of the inspection process.

Updated 22 January 2019

About the service:

Ecclesbourne Lodge is a residential home, which was providing personal care for up to ten young adults aged between 18 and 35 years, who have a learning disability and autism. The home is divided into two separate houses, Brook and Fern. Each house had its own kitchen and communal spaces. People had their own room with an ensuite. At the time of the inspection there were eight people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service met the characteristics of good in all areas, and meets ‘Outstanding’ in the Responsive domain.

People’s needs were at the heart of the service being provided. Staff were exceptionally knowledgeable about the care people required and the importance of people’s life history in establishing plans which were effective. Staff received the necessary training to enable them to have the skills for their role. There was a wide range of activities which were planned and tailored to each person. The environment had been considered to support people’s needs and the spaces available.

Where people had behaviours which challenged, the plans reflected an approach which was reviewed and monitored to ensure this reflected the correct amount of detail and interventions.

There was an education programme which provided people with skills to support them with daily life skills and improving their independence.

When new people came to the home, there was a comprehensive approach to ensuring staff had the knowledge and skills to support people with their transition and next steps in living at the home.

Staff were supported with a management structure which offered guidance and progressions within people’s roles.

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. Health care had a focus to ensure people’s ongoing wellbeing.

People’s plans of care and other important information was provided in a range of formats to support understanding. People could access spiritual support to meet their religious beliefs.

There was a registered manager at the home. The rating was displayed at the home and on their website. When required, notifications had been completed to inform us of events and incidents, this helped us the monitor the action the provider had taken.

Staff had established relationships with people and showed mutual respect for people to ensure their dignity was maintained. Relatives were encouraged to visit and staff supported people to retain their relationships.

The provider completed a range of audits to ensure the home was well run and used information to drive improvements. Complaints had been investigated and outcomes shared.

The provider looked to make improvements and we saw these in relation to end of life care and any lessons learnt. There were sufficient staff to support peoples needs and there was flexibility for this to be increased for events or appointments. Peoples risk were managed and guidance provided to support the staff and reducing the risks. Medicine was managed safety and measures in place to reduce the risk of infections.

Rating at last inspection: Good: report published on 6 July 2016

Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on 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.