About the service:

The House of St Martin is part of the Langley Trust and is a residential care home. It provides accommodation and personal care for up to 31 people living at the House of St Martin. They also provide housing and tenancy services for men with multiple needs, mental health issues and substance misuse issues. The project consists of community houses within the local area. CQC only inspects services that deliver a regulated activity such as personal care, therefore we did not look at this project as part of the inspection.

The House of St Martin has gone through a big change since the last inspection in 2016. In 2018 the Home transitioned from a hostel for ex-offenders to a residential care home. The care home remains focused on working with ex-offenders but also supports men with multiple needs including substance misuse issues, mental health needs or a learning disability.

The management team have had to implement new ways of working since registering as a care home. and review the skills required for the new ways of working. Because of this the provider is reviewing referrals on a case by case basis. The provider told us this was to ensure staffing levels and skills meet the needs of people living in the home. At the time of the inspection 17 people lived at the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

However, whilst the home was managed by a supportive and progressive management team who were clearly committed to improving the service, we did find areas of concern during the inspection that had not been improved in a timely manner. For example:

•Care plans were not always person centred and people did not have end of life plans in place.

•Staff were not always well trained with regards to managing people’s physical healthcare needs and the provider had not made sure everyone had access to homes transport vehicle.

•People told us they felt safe living at The House of St Martin. People described staff as caring and kind towards them. Staff were approachable and friendly with people they cared for and knew them well.

•The house was homely and looked after, and we observed people engaging with each other in a supportive manner. Interactions between staff and people was respectful and we saw lots of banter which people seemed to enjoy.

•The grounds were extensive and the provider had plans to develop them so that people could learn new skills such as growing their own vegetables and creating outside areas where people can have personal space.

•Where needed, staff were quick to support people to have access to health care professionals such as GPs, dentist and opticians or, when necessary, emergency services.

•People had their nutritional needs met. People told us they enjoyed the food and there was plenty of choice. People had access to drinks and snacks throughout the day.

•There were some restrictions placed on people as part of their release from prison. People told us staff were sensitive to these restrictions and did their best not to let them affect what people wanted to achieve.

•There was a house representative who attended national meetings with the provider. These meetings enabled people who lived at the House of St Martin to have a voice and feed in to policy and development at a national level.

•The management of risk to people was robust, and people’s medicines were managed well. There was an outside contractor that came in everyday to manage infection control within the home and staff checked health and safety concerns, such as water outlets and fire equipment. The provider carried out robust quality assurance checks which had highlighted some of the concerns found during the inspection.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated as Good (September 2016).

Why we inspected:

This inspection was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service

This inspection took place on 12 September 2016 and was announced. The registered provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location was for people who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that the manager and some of the people who used the service would be available to speak with us.

House of St Martin is registered to provide personal care for adult male offenders and those at risk of offending. It also offers a floating support service in Somerset which does not come within the scope of our registration requirements. House of St Martin is a supported living service. Supported living is a way of providing housing and support to help people to lead independent lives. The service also provides support to people in their own homes in the community that includes personal care and social support and prompting with daily activities.

Care and support is provided twenty four hours a day by staff who work from an office on the premises. House of St Martin is a service run by a national Christian charity, Langley House Trust, which delivers offender rehabilitation services. The service aims to provide assistance and support to enable people to make positive life changes and live life crime-free. House of St Martin has accommodation for 19 people. At time of visit, five people lived there. One person was away from the home for a few days on a family visit.

There is a registered manager 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 registered manager and staff had the skills and knowledge needed to support people living in the main house and in the community.

People said they were supported by kind and caring staff. One person said, “The staff have been brilliant. (Member of staff) has stopped people going off the tracks. They are as good as gold here. (Member of staff) has the magic touch. They are really good. I can’t praise them enough.” Another person said “the staff are good. They do listen. They do their jobs with respect and kindness.”

People received support that was responsive to their needs and personalised to their wishes and preferences. People were able to make choices about how the service supported aspects of their day to day lives.

This inspection took place on 12 September 2016 and was announced. The registered provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location was for people who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that the manager and some of the people who used the service would be available to speak with us.

House of St Martin is registered to provide personal care for adult male offenders and those at risk of offending. It also offers a floating support service in Somerset which does not come within the scope of our registration requirements. House of St Martin is a supported living service. Supported living is a way of providing housing and support to help people to lead independent lives. The service also provides support to people in their own homes in the community that includes personal care and social support and prompting with daily activities.

Care and support is provided twenty four hours a day by staff who work from an office on the premises. House of St Martin is a service run by a national Christian charity, Langley House Trust, which delivers offender rehabilitation services. The service aims to provide assistance and support to enable people to make positive life changes and live life crime-free. House of St Martin has accommodation for 19 people. At the time of our visit there were four people who lived there.

There is a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to man

There were 17 people in residence on the day of our visit. We spoke with three people who used the service and five members of staff. People we spoke with said “all staff are brilliant”, “they’ve got time for you”, “they listen, help you sort out issues” and that there was a “good atmosphere”.

We saw evidence that arrangements were in place to obtain consent of people who used the service. During the information gathering process we saw that people had time to think about the options available to them.

One person we spoke with said they had been involved in drawing their support plan up and that it contained “realistic goals”. They said that their opinions had been “definitely” taken into consideration and that it reflected their needs.

People who used the service that we spoke with said that staff were very good at their jobs, comments included “very professional” and “my key worker is wonderful”. People said that staff were competent and that they were “looked after”.

People said staff were good at “organisation”, “managing time”, “prioritising”, “communicating”, “caring” and one person said that they felt “they actually care rather than just a job”.

People we spoke with said that there were “ample opportunities to voice any concerns” and “we get listened to”. One person said “it’s improved my personal situation with the help I’ve got”. We saw that the results of annual surveys were fed back to people via DVD’s or a hard copy.

People told us that they were involved in the planning of their care and support in discussion with their key worker. Staff told us that people choose and agree the goals they are going to work on.

We saw assessments and support plans that were comprehensive and thorough, signed by the people using the service to indicate their agreement with the plans.

People told us that they felt involved in the running of the service through "service user meetings" and also through regular discussions with staff. We saw notes from these meetings which had action points. People told us that "everything we have asked for has been done".

We found that staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and we saw a training plan and certificates which showed us that they had attended the relevant training. People told us that they felt safe living at the House of St. Martin.

Staff told us that the supervision and general training was felt to be supportive, giving them the skills and knowledge to deliver a good service to the people living at St. Martins.

The manager showed us a number of systems which ensured that the quality of the service being delivered was regularly monitored to ensure that people were safe and receiving effective care and support.