Forest Hall

Updated 7 April 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

Service and service type

Forest Hall is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with one person who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with two members of staff including the, registered manager and a support worker.

We reviewed a range of records. This included one person’s care records and two medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with one relative who had written to us about their relation’s experience. They gave us permission to quote from their written information.

Updated 7 April 2020

About the service

Forest Hall is a care home providing personal and nursing care for up to six people with autism or a mental health condition. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting three people.

The service was divided into four self-contained flats. Two flats accommodate one person and two flats can accommodate two people, each with their own bedrooms. An office is located within one of the flats.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they were safe and well looked after by staff. The home had dealt with any safeguarding concerns appropriately. Risks associated with people’s care and daily lives had been assessed and action taken to minimise these. There were enough staff to support people and safe recruitment processes had been followed. The home was clean and tidy. People were appropriately supported to take their medicines.

Individual’s need and personal choices were well supported by the service. Staff had a range of training, although we noted that the scope of mandatory training could be wider. Staff received regular supervision and appraisals. People were helped to make their own choice of meals and supported to shop for the ingredients. The service worked closely with other agencies to ensure people’s health and wellbeing.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The design of the home allowed people to have as much independence as possible and maintain their privacy and dignity.

People told us they liked living at the home and the staff were caring and supportive. People were supported to make choices about their care, as much as possible. Staff had a good understanding of people’s personalities and worked to maintain their independence and extend their skills.

People’s care plans were extremely detailed but often contained duplicate information. We have made a recommendation about improvements to the care planning process. Care plans were regularly reviewed to ensure they remained relevant and fully reflected people’s changing needs. Information was provided in a format that was accessible to people. Staff assisted people to access the local community and supported then to engage in a range of activities. The provider had received a small number of informal complaints which had been dealt with appropriately.

Staff told us the registered manager was extremely supportive and a relative said they thought the registered manager was a strong leader. A number of quality checks and audits were undertaken, although the detail was not always thorough. We have made a recommendation about this. People were supported to engage in the running of the service as much as possible. There was clear evidence the service worked in partnership with several agencies to support people who lived at the home. The provider was meeting their legal obligations in terms of notifying the Commission or incidents and events.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 9 April 2019 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the date the service was first registered.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.