Archived: Garendon Residential Home

Updated 11 December 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 a comprehensive inspection. It took place on 1 November 2018 and was unannounced. One inspector undertook this inspection.

Before our inspection visit we contacted the Local Authority. They had no information of concern about the service. We looked at information we had received from people who shared their experience; and from notifications of events we had received from the provider. We also looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR) sent to us by the provider. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, including what they do well and improvements they plan to make.

During our inspection visit we spoke with the senior care worker, two care staff, four people and two relatives. We checked one person’s care record, checked a sample of medication records and health and safety records, as well as team and resident meeting records. The registered manager was not working at the service on the day of our inspection. We spoke with them by phone on the day of our visit, and the day after.

Updated 11 December 2018

Garendon Residential Home is a care home for a maximum of 14 people with learning disabilities and autism. The service comprises of two semi-detached buildings made into one larger home. Most bedrooms are single rooms. People only share when they have chosen to do so. At the time of our inspection visit, 11 people lived at the home.

The service was registered with the CQC prior to the CQC’s publication of ‘Registering the Right Support’ guidance for homes which accommodate people with learning disabilities and autism. Our guidance now says people with learning disabilities should not live in homes of more than six people. Although the service does not meet our new criteria, people have lived with each other for many years and describe the home as being a ‘family’.

At our last inspection we rated the service as ‘good’. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service mostly continued to be safe. Staff understood the risks to people’s health and wellbeing and acted to lessen each risk. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs; and checks had been made on staff before they started working for the service to make sure they were safe to work with people. People received their medicines as prescribed. The home was clean and tidy and staff understood infection control practice. Premises were well-maintained, but the surface temperature of radiators put people at risk of being scalded. The registered manager dealt with this issue quickly.

The service continued to be effective. Staff received training to support them to work effectively with people who lived at the home. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed. People had access to different health and social care professionals when required, and good relationships had been formed between the service and those professionals. People received food they enjoyed, and were involved in menu planning.

The service continued to be caring. People received care from staff who were kind, treated them with dignity and respected their privacy. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported and understood people’s needs, preferences, and what was important to them. The service supported people to maintain and develop relationships with their family.

The service continued to be responsive. People’s needs were assessed and planned for with the involvement of the person. People lived purposeful lives having opportunities to work and train in the community, as well as being involved in pursuing their interests and hobbies. There was a complaints procedure, although no complaints had been made to the service since our last inspection. Procedures were in place for planned end of life care.

The service continued to be well-led. The registered manager worked hard to ensure a good quality of service was maintained. The registered manager provided good support to the staff group, and to people who lived at the home. Checks were made to ensure the service met its obligations to provide safe accommodation to people and to deliver care and support which met people’s individual needs.