Archived: Rachel Mazzier House

Rachel Mazzier House is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home provides accommodation for up to 6 people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. On the day of our inspection there were four people living at the home. The home is converted from a residential house in a suburb of Brighton. The home has six single bedrooms. There was a communal lounge and a dining room plus bathrooms and toilets. The home provides a service to people from the Jewish and wider community.

At our last inspection we rated the service 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 care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

Staff had a good awareness of the of the importance of protecting people and what to do if they considered people were not being treated appropriately. Risks were assessed and there were procedures to mitigate these. Medicines were safely managed. Sufficient numbers of staff were provided to meet people’s needs. Checks were made on the suitability of new staff to work in a care setting. The service was clean and hygienic. Reviews of accidents and incidents took place.

Care staff were supported well and had access to a range of training courses including in the care of people with a learning disability. Staff had a good awareness of the cultural needs of people.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed and people were supported to choose their own meals. Health care needs were assessed and the provider made referrals to health services where this was needed.

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. The provider had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and made appropriate referrals to the local authority when people did not have capacity and whose freedom was restricted for their own safety.

Care staff treated people with dignity and respect. People were supported to make decisions about their care and support which promoted their independence. Care staff had a good understanding of the need to ensure people’s privacy was upheld and for promoting people’s rights.

People’s needs were assessed. Each person had care plans which reflected their needs, preferences and choices. People’s communication needs were assessed and communication tools were used to involve people in decision making.

People were able to raise concerns with the staff and there was a complaints procedure was made available to people.

The service was well – led. There were systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service which involved seeking the views of people, their relatives and health and social care professionals.

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.

Feedback received from people, relatives and health care professionals was positive about the care and support people received and the approach of the staff in the service. Staff supported people to maintain and build on their independence. They showed respect and maintained people’s dignity. People had access to health care professionals when they needed it.

People told us they felt at home at Rachel Mazzier House. Visitors were warmly welcomed and people were supported to maintain their own friendships and relationships. The staff team were responsive to people’s social needs and supported people to maintain and foster interests and relationships that were important to them. People were central to the practices involved in the planning and reviews of their support.

People told us that staff were kind and caring. One person told us, “I like living here. It’s nice. We are all friends.” We observed staff responding to people with dignity and respect and involving them in decisions regarding their support.

People told us they felt safe. One person said, “I feel very safe, it’s a good group home. My Rabbi has helped me. If I didn’t feel safe I could talk to anybody here.” Staff had a clear understanding of the procedures in place to safeguard people from abuse. Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely by staff who were suitably trained. People were supported to manage their medicines safely. Recruitment records showed there were systems in place to ensure staff were suitable to work at the service.

Staff and the manager were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They were aware this legislation protected the rights of people who lacked capacity to make decisions about their care and welfare.

Systems for effective management were been established in all areas. For example, records were up to date and completed in a consistent way. People received regular assessments of their needs and any identified risks. Records were maintained in relation to people’s healthcare, for example when people were supported with making or attending GP appointments.

People liked the food provided and were involved in the planning of menus. One person said, “My sister is a food writer and they will tell you it a well-balanced diet and good food. In the house it’s all Kosher but outside we don’t have to keep Kosher if we don’t want to”.

People and their relatives were given information on how to make a complaint. Feedback from people was asked for and responded to.

The service was well led and had good leadership and direction from the manager and deputy manager. Staff felt fully supported by the managers to undertake their roles. A person centred culture was promoted and embedded. There were robust quality assurance systems in place to ensure a high quality of care and support was provided.

We found that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found that people's needs were assessed and reviewed regularly. Care was planned and delivered in line with individual care plans. One person told us, "I have my review with my keyworker and also my keyworker from my day centre. It's very good and my chance to say what I want to say and ask those questions I've been saving up. So I'm happy. I wouldn't want to be anywhere else".

We saw there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. During our inspection, we viewed people's bedrooms, communal areas, bathrooms and the kitchen. We saw the equipment the service used was clean and well maintained.

There was a complaint policy and procedures in place. The people who lived at Rachel Mazzier House and staff who worked there knew the steps to follow should they wish to complain. People told us, 'I can't complain about any aspect of living here. I love it."

As far as practicable and in accordance with their individual care plans, people were enabled and supported to make choices about their daily lives. They had input into how the home was run and were able to influence decision making processes. Care workers had developed awareness and a sound understanding of each individual's care and support needs. This was evident from direct observation of individuals being supported in a professional, sensitive and respectful manner.

Communication and consultation with people's family members was effective and ongoing. Relatives were always made welcome at the home. They felt well informed and had the opportunity to partake in individual assessment, care planning and reviews.

Positive comments received from people living in the home and their relatives indicated a high level of satisfaction with the home and the services provided:

'I like living here, I like my room and I have everything I need'.

'My son has lived there for many years and is very happy and content. It is unbelievable how well they care for people'.

'The care provided is exceptional and the manager and staff are excellent and so helpful. It gives me peace of mind knowing that he is being so well looked after and his needs are being met'.