Archived: Bramble Brook House

Updated 9 August 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was 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.

This inspection took place on 4 and 5 July 2016 and was unannounced. On the first day of the inspection, the team consisted of one inspector and one expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. On the second day of the inspection, there was one inspector.

Before the inspection visit, the provider completed 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. As part of our planning we reviewed the information in the PIR.

We reviewed the information we held about the service, which included notifications. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that the registered provider must inform CQC about.

We spoke with six people who used the service and four relatives. We spoke with the registered manager, assistant manager, senior care team leader and three care staff.

We looked at the care records of two people two staff employment records, and other records related to the management of the service. This included quality assurance, staff training records and policies and procedures.

Updated 9 August 2016

This inspection took place on 4 & 5 July 2016 and was unannounced.

Bramble Brook House provides residential care for up to 40 older people, who may have a physical disability, or sensory impairment. There are bedrooms on the ground and first floors. There were 19 people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. The home is required to have 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff understood how to protect people from abuse and were responsive to their needs. People were protected against the risk of abuse, as checks were made to confirm staff were of good character to work with people. Sufficient staff were available to meet people's diverse needs.

Risk assessments and care plans had been developed with the involvement of people and their representatives. Staff had the relevant information on how to minimise identified risks to ensure people were supported in a safe way.

People were supported to take their medicine as and when needed, for example staff asked people if they were ready to take their medicines. However medicine storage was not always effective and self-medicating procedures were not clear.

Staff received training to meet the needs of people living at the service and received supervision, to support and develop their skills.

The registered manager and staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported people to make their own decisions. People’s needs and preferences were met when they were supported with their dietary needs. People had access to health support; referrals were made to relevant health care professionals when required.

People told us staff were caring and kind and that they had confidence in them to provide the support they needed. The culture of the home empowered people to maintain their dignity and privacy. Staff understood the needs and preferences of the people they supported and worked in partnership with them and their representatives.

People had opportunities to pursue their hobbies and interests and their lifestyle choices were respected by staff.

People and their representatives knew how to make a complaint and were confident that their complaint would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

Arrangements were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service, so that actions could be put in place to drive improvement. However the providers internal audit did not pick up the issues we identified. The management of the service were open and transparent. Positive communication was encouraged and people’s feedback was sought by the registered manager to further develop the service and drive improvement.