Archived: 8 Brantwood Road

People’s experience of using this service:

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People were free to leave the home when they wanted, there were no restrictions in place.

People told us they were safe and liked living at the home. People living in 8 Brantwood Road needed minimal support with their personal care needs. Staff mainly encouraged people to complete tasks independently.

People told us staff talked to them about how to stay safe in the home and in the community. They told us if they had any concerns they would talk with staff. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and how to report their concerns internally and externally to local safeguarding authorities.

People told us they knew what risks were involved when they were in the home, doing activities or accessing the community. Risk assessments were in place to identify possible risks to people`s health and well-being and measures were implemented to manage the risks.

There were enough staff to meet people`s needs. The registered manager told us people needed no support during the night and they had an emergency contact number in case there was an emergency. However, there were no individual assessments for people to establish if they knew how to ask for help. We recommended to the provider to carry out risk assessments to establish the level of risk during the night to each person when staff were not in the building.

Care plans were well developed and personalised to give guidance to staff on how to support people effectively. People were encouraged to eat a health balanced diet. They had regular heath checks and staff supported them to attend their regular health appointments.

People told us staff were kind and caring and helped them. People`s personal information was kept confidential.

People were involved in discussions about their care and had monthly meetings with their allocated staff member (key worker) to review their mental health.

Staff received training in subjects considered mandatory by the provider and had further opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge. People were also encouraged to develop their knowledge by attending different learning courses like fire awareness and about how to keep good oral health.

The provider had a five-year customer engagement strategy. This is where they rolled out various engagement programs for people, gather feedback and seek the views of people in terms of shaping the service to meet their needs.

People`s dignity and privacy was promoted and respected by staff. Staff enabled people to maintain and develop relationships and stay safe.

People were encouraged to engage in activities, pursue hobbies and interests and socialise. Opportunities were created by the provider for people from all their services to get together regularly and participate in workshops they were interested in.

The provider`s governance systems and processes were effective and identified areas of the service where improvements were needed. The registered manager and the provider completed regular audits to ensure the service provided to people was effective and safe.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 07 June 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

8 Brantwood Road is a residential home in Luton providing accommodation and personal care to up to five people who have a condition which affects their mental health. At the time of our inspection there were four people using the service although one was only staying for a few days as a part of a long-term transition process. The service shares a registered manager with 95 Ashburnham Road which is another of the provider’s services nearby.

There was 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.

People were safeguarded from avoidable risk of harm and staff understood the process to follow to report concerns regarding people’s safety. There were risk assessments in place which detailed how people could be supported safely without compromising on positive risk taking. People’s care plans were person-centred and included information regarding their backgrounds, preferences and how they could be supported effectively. These were subject to regular review with involvement from people. Each person had a link worker who provided them with regular opportunities to share feedback and express their views. Customer meetings gave people the opportunity to come together to share their experiences and discuss issues relating to the service. There was evidence of proactive involvement and people being supported to access a range of services and support if desired.

People’s healthcare needs were identified and met by the service and people were supported to attend regular appointments with community-based professionals. People had enough to eat and drink and were encouraged to develop and maintain their independence where possible. People were treated with dignity and respect and gave their consent to receiving care and treatment at the service.

Staff received a variety of training to enable them to carry out their duties effectively. They completed a thorough induction programme when they first joined the service. The recruitment processes used to employ new staff were safe and ensured that staff employed had the skills, character and experience to meet people’s needs. There were enough staff to keep people safe. The registered manager held team meetings and sent out staff surveys to provide staff with an opportunity to provide their feedback and contribute to the development of the service. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People and staff were positive about the registered manager and felt supported to contribute to the development of the service. Staff had regular supervision and performance reviews. There was a robust quality monitoring system in place for identifying improvements that needed to be made across the service.

People told us that they received their medicines at the appropriate time. One person said, 'The staff look after my medicines. They make sure I take my tablets to make sure I don't get a relapse.' Another person said, 'Staff monitor the side effects of my tablets and make sure I have regular blood tests.'

People described staff as, 'very good and helpful.' People said they were aware of how to make a complaint. They were confident that any complaints made would be dealt with appropriately.

We found the service had suitable arrangements in place to gain and review consent from people who used the service and act on them. People had their medicines administered safely and appropriately from staff qualified to do so. People were looked after by staff who were appropriately qualified and fit to do their job. The service had systems in place to ensure people's comments or complaints were carefully considered and responded to appropriately.