Archived: Churchill House

Churchill House is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care to 12 people with mental health needs, aged 18 and over at the time of the inspection. The home can support a maximum of 12 people. The care home accommodates people in two separate wings, with six people in each wing, which have separate adapted facilities.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were safe in the home and there were procedures to protect them from abuse. Risks associated with people’s needs were assessed.

The premises and environment were safe for people and well maintained. We made a recommendation for the provider to look into installing window restrictors as an additional safety mechanism and to prevent unauthorised access to 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 policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were provided their medicines as prescribed. People were supported with their nutritional needs and had choices with meals. They had access to health care professionals, such as GPs when required. They received care and support from staff who were kind and compassionate.

Staff treated people with dignity and respected their privacy.

Staff were recruited safely and were supported with training and supervisions for their development. Staff maintained positive relationships with the people they supported. They understood people’s needs, preferences and what was important to them. People’s independence was promoted.

Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s support needs. People's end of life wishes were explored. People and relatives were supported with complaints they wished to make. They were able to provide their feedback about the home.

Staff felt supported by the management team and told us there was a positive culture within the home.

The registered manager carried out audits and checks to ensure the home was providing a good standard of care. They were committed to make continual improvements and there was a clear management structure in place.

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

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection on 30 August 2016 (report published 26 October 2016), the service was rated ‘Good’.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

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

We previously inspected Churchill House on 30 July 2015 and found breaches of legal requirements in relation to protecting people against abuse, the risks associated with assessments, planning and delivery of care and treatment, effective mechanisms for people to make complaints and maintaining up to date, accurate records.

After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breaches. We undertook this inspection to look comprehensively at the whole service again and check that they had followed their action plan, confirming that they now met legal requirements.

The service is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to 12 adults with mental health needs. On the day of our inspection there were 10 people living in the service. The accommodation is a conversion of two adjoining houses merging into one large house. The service did not have a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

We have asked the provider to clarify what action they will be taking to ensure there is a registered manager in future because we were concerned that there had not been a registered manager in the service for over twelve months.

At this inspection we found there were improvements to record keeping, risk assessments and procedures relating to safeguarding people from abuse and complaints. The service was meeting these legal requirements. Care staff understood their responsibilities to protect the people in their care. They were knowledgeable about how to protect people from abuse and from other risks to their health and welfare.

The service provided care and support to people to enable them to become more independent. We found that people were cared for by sufficient numbers of qualified and skilled staff. Staff also received one to one supervision and received regular training. People were supported to consent to care and treatment. The service operated in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People’s needs were assessed. Care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. The care plans contained a good level of information setting out how each person should be supported to ensure their needs were met. The care plans included risk assessments as some people had restrictions placed upon them by the Ministry of Justice. People were supported to take their medicines on time and medicine records were up to date.

People were given choices about what they wanted to eat and drink and they were supported to access healthcare professionals. People’s finances were managed and audited regularly by staff so that people’s money was kept safely and securely.

Staff had good relationships with people living at the service and we observed positive and caring interactions. Staff respected people’s wishes and their privacy. They were supported to express their views. People pursued their own individual activities and interests, with the support of staff. The environment was safe and clear of any health and safety hazards.

There was a structure in place for the management of the service. People, relatives and visitors could identify who the area manager and proprietor were. People felt comfortable sharing their views and speaking with the managers if they had any concerns. The management team demonstrated a good understanding of their role and responsibilities. Staff and people told us the management team were supportive, approachable and friendly. There were systems to routinely monitor the safety and quality of the service provided.

People’s records were kept up to date and reflected their current health needs including any advice given by other healthcare professionals. People were supported by staff who had attended relevant training. This enabled staff to keep up to date with good practice and deliver safe care.