Background to this inspection
Updated
11 April 2019
The inspection:
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team:
The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type:
Birchgrove is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. However, the registered manager had left the service a few days prior to our inspection and the team manager had responsibility for the service.
What we did:
Prior to the inspection visit we gathered information from a number of sources. We also looked at the information received about the service from notifications sent to the Care Quality Commission by the registered manager. We asked the provider to complete a provider information return [PIR]. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also spoke with other professionals supporting people at the service, to gain further information about the service.
We spent time observing staff interacting with people. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with one person who used the service and met another person. We also spoke with one support worker and the team manager in depth, and briefly spoke with another support worker. We looked at documentation relating to two people who used the service, two staff files and information relating to the management of the service.
Updated
11 April 2019
About the service: Birchgrove is a care home for up to three people with a learning disability. It is located in a community setting on the edge of the town of Matlock in Derbyshire. At the time of our inspection three people were using the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People were not always protected from the risk and spread of infection. People who used the service were safeguarded from the risk of abuse. Risks associated with people’s care had been identified and were managed to keep people safe. There were sufficient staff available to support people to meet their needs.
The design, adaptation and decoration of the premises did not always meet people’s individual needs. People’s needs were assessed and care was provided in line with their preferences. Staff we spoke with felt they were trained and supported to meet the requirements of their job. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. People had access to healthcare professionals when required.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
We observed staff interacting with people and found they were supportive, kind and caring. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.
People received person-centred care which was based on their needs and took in to consideration their preferences. People were supported to access the community and be involved in activities of their choice.
The service had a complaints procedure and people were supported to raise concerns.
The registered manager had recently left the service and the team manager was in charge. The team manager completed a range of audits in areas such as, medicine management, health and safety and documentation. However, there were some areas which were not audited such as infection control. Actions raised as part of the audits were recorded but not always actioned by the provider.
More information is in the full report.
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 24 August 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up: We plan to continue to inspect the service in line with our inspection programme for services rated requires improvement. Until then we will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people receive safe, compassionate, high quality care.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk