Mulberry House

Updated 4 July 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 was an unannounced inspection, which was completed on 6 and 11 June 2018. One inspector carried out this inspection. This was the first inspection of this service since they registered with us in July 2017.

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 planned to make.

We reviewed the information included in the PIR along with information we held about the home. This included notifications; these are information about important events, which the home is required to send us by law.

We contacted four health and social care professionals to obtain their views on the home and how it was being managed. This included the local community learning disability team, the medical practice and a commissioner of the service. A commissioner is a public organisation that funds the care of people. You can see what they told us in the main body of the report.

During the inspection we looked at two people’s records and those relating to the running of the home. This included staffing rotas, policies and procedures and recruitment and training information for staff. We spoke with four staff and the manager.

People were unable to tell us about their experience of living at Mulberry House due to their complex needs. We spent time observing people and their interactions with staff.

We spoke with a friend of one of the people living in the home to seek their views about the service. You can see what they told us in the main body of the report.

Updated 4 July 2018

This inspection took place on 6 and 11 June 2018 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection of Mulberry House since registration in July 2017 with the Care Quality Commission. This service was previously located in Warmley near Bristol. The Trust purchased this new property because it was recognised that the people needed accommodation that was all on one level. Four of the five people moved to the new property together from the property in Warmley.

Mulberry House provides accommodation for up to 5 adults with a learning disability. At the time of our visit there were 5 people living at the home. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

A manager was in post. They had started working in Mulberry House in May 2018. Appropriate documentation had been submitted to the Care Quality Commission in respect of them becoming the registered manager of Mulberry House. 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 service 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. This was the vision of the Trust, the manager and staff working at Mulberry House. People were very much part of their local community and care was tailored to the person.

People were safe. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and to spend time socialising with them. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because there were clear procedures in place to recognise and respond to abuse and staff had been trained in how to follow the procedures. Systems were in place to ensure people were safe including risk management, checks on the equipment, fire systems and safe recruitment processes.

People received effective care because staff had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. People's healthcare needs were monitored by the staff. Other health and social care professionals were involved in the care and support of the people living at Mulberry House.

People were treated in a dignified, caring manner, which demonstrated that their rights were protected. Where people lacked the capacity to make choices and decisions, staff ensured people’s rights were protected by involving relatives or other professionals in the decision making process. Staff recognised the importance of effective communication enabling them to respond to people in a person centred way. This was very important as the people living in Mulberry House used non-verbal communication.

The home provided a caring service to people. People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and very committed to providing care that was tailored to the person. People were treated with kindness and compassion.

People received a very responsive service. Care and support was personalised and person led. People were supported to take part in a variety of activities and trips out based on their interests and aspirations. People were involved and included in the running of the home. People were actively engaged in looking after their home and meal preparation.

The home was well-led. The manager and provider had monitoring systems, which enabled them to identify good practices and areas of improvement. It was evident they strived to provide the best experience for people and developing care that was tailored to the person.