Griffin House

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

The service met all relevant fundamental standards.

A registered manager was in post. 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.

The service maintained effective systems to safeguard people from abuse. Staff were aware of what to look out for and how to report any concerns. Information about safeguarding was available for staff to access.

Risk was fully assessed and reviewed. Positive risk taking was encouraged to improve people's skills and promote their independence.

Medicines were safely stored and administered in accordance with best-practice. Staff were trained in administration.

Care and support were delivered in line with current legislation and best-practice. For example, the service made use of positive behaviour support models to ensure that behaviours were clearly understood and to reduce the use of behaviours that challenged.

The service ensured that staff were trained to a high standard in appropriate subjects. This training was subject to regular review to ensure that staff were equipped to provide effective care and support.

People were supported by staff to maintain their health and wellbeing through access to a wide range of community healthcare services and specialists as required.

It was clear that the décor of Griffin House had been designed with the needs and preferences of the people

living there in mind. Rooms were decorated in a manner which was age appropriate and reflected the personalities of the people living there.

The service operated in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People were supported to maintain important family relationships and regular contact. The family members that we spoke with were extremely positive about the impact that this had on their relationships.

People were actively involved in decisions about their care. Staff took time to explain important information and offer choices. This was achieved by talking face to face and using Makaton to support understanding. Makaton is a simplified sign language used by some people with a learning disability.

People's care records were extremely detailed and personalised to meet their individual preferences and needs. There was clear evidence that care plans were subject to regular review.

We saw evidence that each person had an individual model of support which included activities that reflected their preferences. People's regular activities were displayed on a weekly timetable which used images to aid understanding.

People spoke positively about the management of the service and the approachability of staff.

People using the service and staff were actively involved in discussions about the service and were asked to share their views. This was achieved through regular meetings, discussions and surveys.

We saw evidence that the service worked effectively with other health and social care agencies to achieve better outcomes for people and improve quality and safety. This included staying up to date with developments in learning disability care through membership of the British Institute for Learning Disabilities (BILD).

Further information is in the detailed findings below

The five questions we ask about services and what we found