Champion House

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. At the time of the assessment, the service was not used by anyone with a primary learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.

At the last assessment we identified breaches of 5 regulations relating to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, staffing, recruitment and good governance. Risks associated with people's care had not been assessed effectively, medicines were not always managed safely, and systems had not been effective in identifying concerns. People did not always experience safe pathways and transitions between services. At this assessment we found improvements had been made.

The service demonstrated progress in several areas, particularly in the reporting and review of accidents, incidents, and falls. Information about individual needs and associated risks was gathered from people and those involved in their care, although participation in care reviews and risk assessments was not always clear.

Staff morale was noted to have improved, contributing positively to the overall atmosphere within the service.

Recruitment processes were confirmed as safe, and care plans now provide sufficient detail to support safe and effective care delivery. End-of-life plans were also in place and reflected people’s wishes. Protocols for medicines prescribed on an as-required basis were available, but some lacked adequate guidance for staff on when and how to administer these medicines. No harm was caused to people.

Although staff had completed training, a small number of staff couldn’t demonstrate a full understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, and this was raised with the manager to ensure principles are fully embedded. Feedback from individuals and families regarding involvement in care planning was mixed; some felt engaged, while others reported limited participation or understanding. Similarly, reviews of activities showed mixed feedback, with some people and families stating they were not involved in relative meetings or care reviews. However we found people and their families had been involved in the care planning and risk assessment processes. People were observed being actively involved in activities.

Quality assurance systems have been introduced to monitor care delivery and people’s experiences, including audits of risk assessments, care records, daily notes, and medication charts. While these systems have improved oversight, these have not yet become embedded to ensure long-term effectiveness.