Jean Marshall House

Updated 5 March 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 inspection took place on 16 January 2018 and was announced. We told the registered manager forty-eight hours before our inspection that we would be coming. This was because we wanted to make sure that the registered manager and other appropriate staff were available to speak with us on the day of our inspection. One inspector undertook the inspection.

We previously carried out a comprehensive inspection on 8 December 2015.

The provider had 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. We looked at other information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports and notifications. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that the service must inform us about. We contacted the local authority commissioning team to ask them about their experiences of the service provided. We contacted by Email two people’s relatives for their experiences of the service provided and received one response.

During the inspection we went to the service and spoke with four people using the service, the nominated individual for the provider, the registered manager, three care staff, and a visiting relative. We spent time looking at records, including two people’s care and support records, five staff files, the recruitment records for two new staff and other records relating to the management of the service, such as policies and procedures, accident/incident recording and audit documentation. We also ‘pathway tracked’ the care for some people using the service. This is where we check that the care detailed in individual plans matches the experience of the person receiving care. It was an important part of our inspection, as it allowed us to capture information about a sample of people receiving care.

Updated 5 March 2018

The inspection took place on the 16 January 2017 and was announced.

Jean Marshall House is part of The Outlook Foundation, a charity which provides accommodation, and/or personal care and training for young adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities. This service provides care and support to people living in a ‘supported living’ setting, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. At the time of the Inspection eight people were living in the service. People have en-suite accommodation and shared the communal facilities. The service is situated in a residential area with easy access to local amenities, transport links and the city centre. Not everyone using Jean Marshall House receives the regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

At the last inspection on 8 December 2015 the service was rated overall Good. At this inspection we found the service remained overall Good. At the last inspection robust recruitment procedures had not always been in place. We asked the provider to take action to make improvements in recruitment procedures and this action has been completed.

Systems had been maintained to keep people safe. People told us they felt safe with the care provided. One person commented, “I love it. I do feel safe. It’s a lovely house.” They knew who they could talk with if they had any worries. They felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to. People remained protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it. Assessments of risks to people had been developed. Staff told us they had continued to receive supervision, and be supported to develop their skills and knowledge by receiving training which helped them to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively. One member of staff told us, “I have had supervision, appraisal and a mid-year review.” People told us care staff had the knowledge and skills to provide their care and support.

People's individual care and support needs continued to be identified before they received a service. Care and support provided was personalised and based on the identified needs of each person. People told us they felt listened to, supported to be independent and they were involved in decisions about their care. One person told us staff, “They help us with our life skills and learn to go out into the world.” Staff had a good understanding of consent.

People and relatives were happy with the care provided. People continued to be supported by kind and caring staff who treated them with respect and dignity. They were spoken with and supported in a sensitive, respectful and professional manner. One person told us, “They (The staff) are lovely. If I am stressed I can talk to the staff.”

The provider continued to have arrangements in place for the safe administration of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. If needed, people were supported with their food and drink and this was monitored regularly. People continued to be supported to maintain good health.

People, relatives and staff told us the service continued to be well led. A relative told us, “Things run smoothly whilst maintaining the all-important core values, and Jean Marshall House as the tenants' home. There's always something going on and a lot of warmth and laughter along with an underlying reliable structure. If Jean Marshall House says something is going to happen it will. I can knock on the door any time I want and am made very welcome.” Staff told us the registered manager was always approachable and had an open door policy if they required some advice or needed to discuss something. Senior staff carried out a range of internal audits, and records confirmed this. People and their relatives were regularly consulted about the care provided through reviews and by using quality assurance questionnaires.