The inspection took place on 6 June 2017 and was unannounced. The last comprehensive inspection took place in December 2015, when the provider was meeting the regulations.Dene Brook is a 14 bed care home, providing support to adults with learning disabilities and who have additional support needs including mental health needs, autistic spectrum disorders and behaviour which challenges. At the time of the inspection there were 12 people living at the home.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for 'Dene Brook' on our website.
Dene Brook is located in Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in its own grounds in a quiet, residential part of the town. Accommodation is provided in discrete flats within the building, with staff based in each flat. Additionally there are central office and meeting facilities, and a craft and activity room.
At the time of our inspection 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.
We spoke with staff who were knowledgeable about safeguarding people from abuse. Staff informed us that they received training in this subject and knew what to do if abuse occurred. They were confident their managers would take appropriate actions without delay.
We looked at four recruitment files and found the provider had a safe and effective system in place for employing new staff.
The provider had a safe system in place to manage medicines. People received their medicines as prescribed and medicines were stored appropriately.
We looked at care plans and found that risks associated with people’s care had been identified. Risk assessments were in place to help minimise the risk occurring.
Staff we spoke with told us they received appropriate training to carry out the roles and responsibilities of their job. Training included moving and handling, first aid, health and safety, fire prevention, safeguarding, and food hygiene.
Through our observations and from talking with staff and the registered manager we found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff confirmed they had received training in this subject.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balance diet which met their needs.
People were offered a choice of food at each meal and drinks and snacks were provided throughout the day in line with their preferences and dietary requirements.
Care plans we looked at contained referrals and other documentation which reflected that people had been supported to maintain good health.
We observed staff supporting people and found they were respectful, kind and caring. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s preferences and knew people well.
People who used the service were supported to receive personalised care which met their needs.
Staff we spoke with knew people well and could explain how they supported people. Staff worked well as a team and responded without delay in urgent situations and ensured people received the right support and were kept safe.
The provider had a complaints procedure and people told us they would talk with staff if they were worried about anything. The registered manager kept a log of concerns received and addressed them effectively.
People we spoke with indicated that they knew the registered manager and the rest of the management team well and knew them by name. Staff told us that the management team were supportive and felt they could speak with them openly and honestly.
A range of audits took place to ensure the service was meeting the required standards. Action plans were introduced to ensure issues were dealt with.
People were involved in the service and their views were sought. The provider completed a satisfaction survey every year to ensure people who used the service, their relatives, staff and visiting professionals, could voice their opinion of the service.