About the service:

Amadeus House is a care home without nursing that at the time of the inspection was providing short-term, therapeutic support and accommodation to 14 men and women experiencing mental health crisis. The service can support up to 17 people. Local health and mental health services refer people to the service for support.

People’s experience of using this service:

People said they felt safe and were supported by staff and managers who had time for them when they needed it, listened to them, and were caring and compassionate.

Staff treated people with respect and promoted people’s independence, dignity and privacy.

People were involved in their support and risk management planning. People’s plans were person-centred, outcome-focused and based on clear assessments of their needs.

The service worked collaboratively with other mental health services to provide effective, timely care and support to people.

Staff received induction, training and supervision and felt supported in their roles.

There was a clear vision for the service, using the ‘recovery’ model of support. Recovery-focused support aims to help people with mental health conditions to engage in an active life, regain hope and retain their independence and achieve a positive sense of self. There was a commitment and focus on providing good care and support. Staff and the management team were clear about their roles in delivering this.

The provider sought feedback from people, relatives and staff and used this to develop the service. Complaints were handled appropriately.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and managers acted when improvements were required. The managers reviewed incidents that had taken place in the service and the lessons learnt from these were used to reduce the risk of the incidents happening again.

Rating at last inspection:

We rated the service good at our last comprehensive inspection. We published our last report on 27 July 2016.

Why we inspected:

This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as

per our re-inspection programme. We may inspect sooner if we receive any concerning information regarding the safety and quality of the care being provided.

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

This inspection took place on 22 and 24 June 2016. The visit on 22 June was unannounced and we told the provider we would return on 24 June to complete the inspection. This was the first inspection of the service.

Amadeus House provides short-term, therapeutic support and accommodation for up to 17 men and women experiencing a mental health crisis. The service uses a recovery model of care and support. At the time of our inspection there were seven people using the service. The service had a registered manager who left the service shortly before this inspection. The provider had put in place interim management arrangements and begun the recruitment process for a new 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.

Although people using the service managed their own medicines, the provider had arrangements in place to ensure people received their medicines safely.

The provider developed risk management plans to mitigate identified risks to people using the service and staff followed these.

There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s support needs and the provider carried out pre-employment checks on new staff to make sure they were suitable to work with people using the service.

The provider, managers and staff carried out regular health and safety checks in the service. The provider ensured safety equipment in the service was regularly serviced and maintained.

Staff working in the service had the skills, training and support they needed to work with people. Records showed that staff had completed training the provider considered mandatory.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their care and staff encouraged them to maintain and develop their independence.

The provider understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People using the service told us they felt staff treated them well. Staff told us they enjoyed working in the service and said they would be happy if a relative or friend lived there.

We saw staff interacted with people in a caring and friendly way and explained the support they gave people to make sure they understood what was happening. People using the service were involved in the development of their care plan and other records, including risk assessments and risk management plans.

Staff understood the care and support needs of people using the service and used the provider’s care planning and risk management procedures to ensure they met these.

The provider had a policy and procedures for people using the service and others about how to make a complaint, along with relevant time lines for responding to complaints.

The registered manager left the service at the end of May 2016. Following the registered manager’s departure, the provider arranged for an interim manager to oversee the day to day running of the service, supported by the two permanent deputy managers.

The provider had systems to monitor the quality of the service that people received and to make improvements. The provider, managers and staff carried out audits and checks to monitor quality in the service and we saw these were up to date.