Archived: The Old Rectory

Updated 27 November 2015

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.

This inspection took place on the 21 October 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of an inspector.

We examined previous inspection reports and notifications sent to us by the registered manager about incidents and events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

The registered provider assisted with the inspection process as the registered manager was not at the service on the day of the inspection visit. We spoke with the registered provider, and four members of staff. We spoke with two people and four relatives. We also contacted other health and social care professionals who provided health and social care services to people. These included community nurses, doctors, local authority care managers and commissioners of services. We looked at personal care records for two people, medicine records; activity records and staff told us about the recruitment process. We observed the care provided to people who were unable to tell us about their experiences.

At the previous inspection on 25 November 2013, the service had met the standards of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010.

Updated 27 November 2015

We carried out this inspection on the 21 October 2015, and it was unannounced.

The Old Rectory is a privately owned care home, providing personal care and accommodation for up to 10 adults with learning disabilities, some of whom may have behaviours that may harm themselves or others. There were nine people living at the service at the time of the inspection. People had complex needs, including mental health and physical health needs. It is one of a group of five care homes owned by Insight Specialist Behavioural Service Ltd. The home in situated near the amenities of Eastchurch.

Some of the people living in the service had a limited ability to verbally communicate with us or engage directly in the inspection process. People demonstrated that they were happy in their home by showing warmth to the staff that were supporting them. Staff were attentive and communicated with people in a warm and friendly manner. Staff were available throughout the day, and responded quickly to people’s requests for care and support.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The registered manager and staff showed that they understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests. Staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and showed they understood and promoted people’s rights through asking for people’s consent before they carried out care tasks.

Staff had been trained in how to protect people from abuse, and discussions with them confirmed that they knew the action to take in the event of any suspicion of, or actual abuse. Staff understood the whistle blowing policy and how to use it. They were confident they could raise any concerns with the registered manager or outside agencies if this was needed.

Staff were knowledgeable about the needs and requirements of people using the service. Staff involved people in planning their own care in formats that they were able to understand, for example pictorial formats. Staff supported them in making arrangements to meet their health needs.

Staff were recruited using procedures designed to protect people from the employment of unsuitable staff. Staff were trained to meet people’s needs and were supported through regular supervision and an annual appraisal so they were supported to carry out their roles.

Medicines were managed, stored, disposed of and administered safely. People received their medicines when they needed them and as prescribed.

People were provided with food and fluids that met their needs and preferences. Menus offered variety and choice.

There were risk assessments in place for the environment, and for each individual person who received care. Assessments identified people’s specific needs, and showed how risks could be minimised. People were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.

There were systems in place to review accidents and incidents and make any relevant improvements as a result.

The registered manager investigated and responded to people’s complaints and people said they felt able to raise any concerns with staff.

Staff respected people and we saw several instances of a kindly touch or a joke and conversation as drinks were being made and at other times during the day.

People were given individual support to take part in their preferred hobbies and interests.

There were systems in place to obtain people’s views about the quality of the service and the care they received. People were listened to and their views were taken into account in the way the service was run.