Archived: Dimensions 7 School Drive

Updated 13 July 2019

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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

There was one inspector in the inspection team.

Service and service type

Dimensions 7 School Road 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.

Although the service had a registered manager they had resigned the day before the inspection, and a new manager had started who intended to register with CQC. 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:

The inspection was unannounced.

What we did:

Prior to the inspection, we looked at the information we held about the service and used this to help us plan our inspection. This included information the provider must notify us about, such as allegations of abuse. We also considered the Provider Information Return (PIR). This information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also gathered feedback from health professionals and commissioners who work to find appropriate care and support services for people and fund the care provided.

During the inspection we spoke with three staff, the deputy manager and the manager. People were not able to verbally communicate with us. We therefore observed their interaction with staff and we also spoke with one relative after the inspection. We reviewed two care plans and systems for checking people’s care.

Updated 13 July 2019

About the service: Dimensions 7 School Drive is a home for people living with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection there were five people living at the home.

Services for people with learning disabilities and or autism are supported

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.

The service was small domestic style property. It was registered for the support of up to five people. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People’s experience of using this service:

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 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.

People liked and were comfortable around staff who understood how to keep them safe. Staff knew the risks to people’s health which were also documented in people’s care plans. The registered provider had a centralised system for recruitment and checking the background of potential staff. Staff and relatives we spoke with told us staffing was sufficient. Staff had received training and undertook checks to ensure people received their medicines safely. Changes made to people’s care were shared with staff so staff understood how to support people.

People's care was based on best practice standards and staff had the correct training to meet people's needs. Guidance on people's care was also shared through supervision and staff meetings. People were offered choices at mealtimes and supported with a specialist diet where appropriate. People were supported to attend healthcare appointments and advice from healthcare professionals was incorporated into people's care.

People liked and responded warmly to staff who understood their individual needs and care requirements. Care staff communicated with people in ways that was appropriate for each person. Care staff treated people with dignity and kindness and respected their personal items and space.

People were encouraged to develop interests and take part in activities that they enjoyed. People’s care plans were reviewed and updated in line with changing needs and preferences. People and their families were encouraged to speak with the staff and management of the home to ensure people received the care they needed. A system was in place to investigating and responding to complaints.

The registered provider had not always checked that notifications for the approvals of a Deprivation of Liberty had been submitted to the CQC as required. When this was identified during the inspection, this was immediately addressed and no harm had come to people.

An action plan was in place and progress was being monitored by the registered provider to ensure people received the care they needed. The registered provider was also supporting a new manager that had taken up the post. Work with other partners was also ongoing and the manager was keen to develop further the links with the local community.

Rating at last inspection: Good (21 September 2017)

Why we inspected: The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about how risks to people were managed. A decision was made for us to bring forward a planned inspection and include those risks.

The information CQC received about the incident indicated concerns about the management of falls from moving and handling equipment. This inspection examined those risks.

We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the Safe and Well led sections of this full report.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor notifications sent into us.

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