CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Autism and Aspergers Care Services Ltd
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment checks, suitable risk assessments and good arrangements for medicines and infection control. A missing as-needed medicine protocol and limited involvement of residents in announced fire drills were identified and addressed or discussed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had regular health reviews, access to healthcare and staff with autism-specific and other relevant training. Staff supported people to make choices, including about food and health, in the least restrictive way.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well, communicated in ways they could understand and respected their privacy, dignity and independence. People and families were involved in care decisions and could maintain important relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed regularly. People were supported to follow their own interests, attend work or volunteering, keep friendships and raise concerns through meetings and regular discussions.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular meetings, audits and action plans, and staff said they felt supported. Inspectors noted that some improvements could be recorded more clearly, including people's views during staff recruitment and completion of improvement actions.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with a few record-keeping and fire-drill improvements identified.
The inspection took place on 1 and 3 October 2019 and was planned. One inspector visited the home, spoke with one resident, staff, the manager and a relative, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home supported two people at the time, although it can provide care for three. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who knew their needs, preferences and communication styles.
People were supported to be independent and to keep work, friendships and interests. The home provided autism-specific training, health support, personalised meals and activities chosen by the people living there.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found consistently good care at the time of the visit, although they also identified some smaller improvements.
Kind and knowledgeable staff
Staff knew people's individual needs, histories and communication styles. Inspectors saw that staff gave people time and did not rush them.
“People received support from staff who knew them well as individuals. They understood their needs and were kind and caring.” from the report
Independence and choice
People were supported to make choices and do things for themselves, including shopping, cooking, work placements and travel.
“The service promoted people's independence.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People took part in activities that reflected their own interests, such as theatre trips, walking, gym, pub visits, music and work.
“They attended work placements independently and where appropriate, staff supported people to take part in activities of their choice to meet their individual needs and wishes.” from the report
Autism-specific support
Staff received specialist training and used detailed plans to support communication, behaviour and changes in routine.
“This included specialist training in autism and positive behavioural support to meet people's complex needs.” from the report
Good oversight
The provider and managers used regular checks, meetings and audits to monitor care and identify improvements.
“A detailed monthly quality assurance system ensured the smooth running of the service.” from the report
As-needed medicine guidance
needs fixingOne person did not initially have a written protocol for an as-needed pain medicine. A protocol was written by the second day of the inspection, so this was a short-lived gap.
“One person did not have a protocol, but it was noted this had little impact for the person” from the report
Health information not fully recorded
needs fixingStaff understood how to support one person's diabetes, but this information was not in the care plan when inspectors checked it. The manager addressed this straight away.
“This detail was not recorded in the person's care plan but as staff could tell us this had no impact for the person.” from the report
Fire-drill records
minorFire drills were announced to staff but not to residents because staff often worked alone. Inspectors discussed ways to show more clearly that the system tested staff properly.
“Fire drills were held at minimum five times a year and these were announced to staff but not to people.” from the report
Goals needed updating
minorTwo long-standing goals appeared to have been achieved. Inspectors said they should instead be replaced with clearer guidance to help staff support the person consistently.
“One person had two goals that had been in place a very long time.” from the report
Some improvement records were incomplete
minorThe home had action plans, but there were no records showing that actions had been completed. Inspectors found other evidence that actions had been done or were in progress.
“Whilst there were no records to demonstrate actions had been completed but we saw evidence in relation to each action that these either had been done or were in progress.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every as-needed medicine has a current written protocol?
- 02How are diabetes support instructions and other health information kept up to date in care plans?
- 03How do you involve residents in fire drills when staff are working alone?
- 04How do you check that care goals are updated when they have been achieved?
- 05How will you record people's views when they take part in staff recruitment?
This was a planned inspection covering the home, its premises and care, with ratings given for all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 November 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Autism and Aspergers Care Services Ltd was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 7 December 2016. The home provided accommodation and personal care for up to three people with a learning disability. Three people were living there at the time.
Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and healthcare professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicine records, staff recruitment and training files, complaints information and quality checks.
The inspectors found that people were safe, supported by trained staff and treated with kindness and respect. People were involved in their care, supported to stay in contact with family and friends, and helped to take part in activities and the wider community.
The home was rated Good overall and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection in October 2013 found that the regulations checked at that time were met.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and preferences, including one-to-one support and extra help for appointments and outings.
“There were enough staff deployed to meet the needs and preferences of people living at the service.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicine records were completed accurately. Staff were trained and assessed as competent, and regular checks were carried out.
“Only staff trained and assessed as competent supported people with their medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People had positive relationships with staff. Their privacy, dignity, choices and personal routines were respected.
“People were offered choices and encouraged to make decisions with their day to day activities.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's health needs, preferences and goals. People and relatives were involved in reviewing their support.
“Support plans detailed guidance for staff on how to support people with their individual needs and in line with their preference.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed, use the wider community and develop daily living skills.
“People had access to a wide range of social and developmental activities which enabled them to lead fulfilling lives.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative's particular communication needs and preferences?
- 02What activities and community outings would be available for my relative?
- 03How would you help my relative develop or keep their independence and daily living skills?
- 04How would you involve us in reviewing care plans and responding to changes in my relative's health?
- 05How are medicines managed if my relative wants to manage some of them independently?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall quality of the home and all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 2016 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Autism and Aspergers Care Services Ltd
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Autism and Aspergers Care Services Ltd →
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Autism and Aspergers Care Services Ltd →
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 September 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East Sussex
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.