Archived: Overton House

Updated 7 October 2016

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 inspection took place on 15 and 17 August 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider 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 reviewed the information in the PIR, along with other information that we held about the service including previous inspection reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We contacted the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams as well as the local Healthwatch board. No one raised any concerns about Overton House.

We spoke with five people, the registered manager, six care staff, the chef and domestic staff. We also spoke with a visiting health professional and a social services care manager. After the inspection we contacted another social services care manager by telephone. We observed the way people were supported in communal areas and looked at records relating to the service. These included four care records, three staff recruitment files, daily record notes, medication administration records (MAR), maintenance records, audits on health and safety, accidents and incidents, policies and procedures and quality assurance records.

The previous inspection took place in July 2014 and all regulations inspected were being met at that time.

Updated 7 October 2016

This inspection took place on the 15 and 17 August and was unannounced.

Overton House is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to 19 people. The home supports people with mild to moderate enduring mental health issues.

At the time of our inspection there were 14 people living at the home. There are five shared rooms and people visit the home and know if they will need to share a room before they move to the home. Overton House is a large older building with lift access to the first floor. People have shared bathrooms, a large and small lounge, dining room and a garden at the front of the building with seating. The home is situated on a main bus route and is close to local amenities.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Everyone we spoke with said they felt safe living at Overton House. They said the staff were kind and caring and knew their needs well. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew the correct action to take if they witnessed or suspected abuse. Staff were confident that the registered manager would act on any concerns raised.

Care plans and risk assessments were in place with guidance for staff in how people wanted to be supported. These had been regularly reviewed and updated when people’s needs changed. Some people were able to access the local community independently. Risk assessments and policies for staff to follow if the person did not return to the home at the agreed time were in place.

People we spoke with told us that the staff at Overton House were kind and caring. During the inspection we observed kind and respectful interactions between staff and people who used the service. Staff showed they had a good understanding of the needs of people who used the service and had received appropriate training in order for them to meet people’s needs. The recruitment process was robust and all required checks were in place prior to staff commencing work. Staff received regular supervisions and said they felt well supported by the registered manager.

Medicines were administered and stored safely. People received their medication as prescribed.

Systems were in place to help ensure people’s health and nutritional needs were met. Records we reviewed showed that staff contacted relevant health professionals to help ensure people received the care and treatment they required.

We found the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Best interest meetings and capacity assessments were held where required. Applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were appropriately made. Staff offered people day to day choices about their care and sought their consent before providing support.

All areas of the home were clean. Procedures were in place to prevent and control the spread of infection. Systems were in place to deal with any emergency that could affect the provision of care, such as a failure of the electricity and gas supply. Regular checks were in place of fire systems and equipment.

We saw people, their relatives and staff had been asked for feedback about the service. A complaints procedure was in place. People we spoke with said the staff and registered manager dealt with any issues they raised verbally without needing to use the formal complaints process. This was confirmed by the staff and registered manager.

We noted there were a number of quality audits in the service; these included medicines, care records and the environment. However not all audits and action plans had been fully documented. The registered manager acknowledged this and said they would document the audits in future.