Archived: Roman House and Scope Inclusion Basingstoke

Updated 26 January 2017

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.

We carried out the visit to the service on 2 December 2016 as an announced inspection. The provider was given 48 hours' notice prior to the inspection because we needed to be sure that the registered manager could be contacted in person on the service’s premises. The inspection was conducted by one inspector.

Before the inspection, the registered manager 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 also reviewed the information we held about the service. This included both information received and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also contacted health and social care professionals and the commissioners of the service for feedback about the service.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. We spoke with two staff members, the registered manager and two relatives. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk to us.

We looked at three people’s care plans and other associated daily records. We also looked at four staff files. We looked at a range of other records relating to the running of the service, which included daily records, audits and policies.

Updated 26 January 2017

This inspection took place on 2 December 2016 and was announced. Roman House and Scope Inclusion Basingstoke is a domiciliary care agency based within Roman House. The service aims to meet the needs of people living in the local community. There were three people using the service at the time of the inspection.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

People using the service had special communication needs and communicated mainly by body language, gestures or sounds. Information on how to communicate with people was incorporated into care plans and staff were familiar with people’s communication needs.

Relatives told us they felt their family members were safe with the service provider. Risks to people were identified, plans were in place to identify and manage assessed risks to people. There were sufficient numbers of staff to keep people safe. Appropriate recruitment practices were in place to ensure that staff were safe to work with vulnerable people.

People were protected from avoidable harm. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and were able to demonstrate that they knew the procedures to follow should they have any concerns.

Staff were suitably trained and had sufficient skills and knowledge to support people effectively. There was a training programme in place to meet people's needs. An induction programme was in place which enabled staff to undertake the Care Certificate. Staff received regular supervision.

People's rights were upheld in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The Mental Capacity Act is a legal framework to protect people who are unable to make certain decisions themselves.

Relatives and health professionals were involved in planning people’s care. People's choices and views were respected by staff. Staff and the registered manager knew people's preferences. People were provided with information in a clear, individualised and accessible way as staff had a good understanding of how people communicated. People's privacy and dignity were respected.

People received the care they needed and staff were aware of the support each person required. Care records were focused on people's wishes and emphasized people’s views and preferences. As a result, staff were able to provide people with relevant care. A complaints procedure was in place. People’s relatives knew how to make a complaint and were confident that staff would respond to it immediately.

The management promoted an open, person-centred culture. There was a clear management structure and people, relatives and staff felt comfortable raising any issues. There were systems in place to monitor and improvement the quality of the service provided. There was an improvement plan in place that identified improvements the provider planned to make.