Broadview

Updated 21 February 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was undertaken by two inspectors.

Service and service type

Broadview is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. 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.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

People who used the service were not able to share their views with us. We spoke with five members of staff including the provider, registered manager, deputy manager, and two support workers. We 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 reviewed a range of records. This included two people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at a sample of staff files in relation to recruitment. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with two people’s relatives by telephone about their experience of the care provided. We received feedback from an external professional involved with the service.

Updated 21 February 2020

About the service

Broadview is a residential care home providing personal care and support for eight younger adults and older people living with learning disabilities and physical and sensory impairments. Broadview accommodates up to eight people living in one adapted building.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was one of three domestic style properties owned by the provider and operating as care homes. It was registered for the support of up to eight people. Six people were using the service on the day of this inspection. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and other domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were safe and protected from the potential risks of abuse and avoidable harm. People were supported and encouraged to be as independent as possible following robust risk assessments. Where risks to people’s health, well-being or safety were identified staff were knowledgeable about these and knew how to respond safely. Incidents and accidents were recorded, investigated and reviewed by the management team. There were enough safely recruited, experienced, skilled and qualified staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff supported people to take their medicines in accordance with prescriber's instructions. Staff had received infection control training and the service was clean and fresh.

Staff received training and refresher updates in basic core areas as well as training specific to meet the needs of the people they supported. Relatives said staff were skilled and competent. Staff felt listened to and supported by the management team. Staff supported people to eat a healthy, balanced diet. People had access to health and social care professionals relevant to their needs. Staff sought people’s consent to the care and support they received, together with that of their relatives or external advocates where appropriate.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Whilst the registered manager was not familiar with the published guidance the service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People’s relatives complimented the staff team for the care and support provided. Staff had developed positive and caring relationships with people and were knowledgeable about their individual needs and personal circumstances. Relatives, where appropriate, were fully involved in the planning and reviews of people’s care and support.

People received personalised care and support that took account of their preferences and personal circumstances. Staff helped and supported people to develop the skills and confidence necessary to maximise their independence. People enjoyed a varied social life according to their personal preferences with the encouragement and support of staff.

The provider had a robust quality assurance process which meant that shortfalls in performance were swiftly identified and addressed in a timely manner. The staff and management team were clear about the provider’s values and the purpose of the services provided. People’s relatives were positive about how the service was managed and the management team.

The provider routinely distributed quality survey forms to people’s relatives, the staff team and health professionals. People’s relatives praised how the home was managed.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 31 July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

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