Archived: Lebrun House

Updated 9 August 2019

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

Day one of the inspection was conducted by two inspectors. Day two was completed by one inspector.

Service and service type

Lebrun House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as 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 the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

During the inspection we looked at rotas and contingency plans, quality assurance processes and records of accidents, incidents and complaints. We reviewed four people’s care and medicines records and three staff files. This included information about recruitment, training and supervision. We spoke with five people using the service, two visitors and a professional. We also spoke with seven members of staff, including the registered manager, deputy manager, head of care, a senior, the activities co-ordinator and two care staff. Due to complex communication needs, some people were not able to speak with us about their experiences. Therefore, we spent time observing people in areas throughout the home and could see the interactions between people and staff.

After the inspection

Following the inspection, we spoke with another health and social care professional and one relative about their views of the service.

Updated 9 August 2019

About the service

Lebrun House is a residential care home that was providing personal care for up to 20 older people, some living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, 17 people were using the service. One of these people was staying at the service on a short-term basis, otherwise known as respite.

Lebrun House is situated over three floors, with several large communal areas for people to use. This included a lounge, dining-room and conservatory. There was also a garden that we saw people enjoying throughout the inspection. Some bathrooms had been adapted to support people with mobility needs.

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

People told us that staff made them feel safe. A relative told us, “The place is secure but it's discreet. You don't feel that people are locked away. They are supported to go out all the time. And staff really know what they’re doing.” There were enough staff and if people’s needs changed, more staff were provided. Risks to people were identified, regularly reviewed and well documented so that staff knew what was expected of them to keep people safe. The building was maintained with a number of health and safety checks from safe and external professionals. People received their medicines safely from trained and competent staff.

Since the previous inspection, significant improvements had been made to staff training and the environment. Staff received training that was specific to people’s needs, such as dementia, diabetes and epilepsy. A relative said, “My loved one is well looked after, and their needs met thoroughly and with love.” Improvements had been made to the environment to ensure that it was dementia friendly. This included clear signage so that people could move around the building without getting confused. People were complimentary about the food at Lebrun House and their nutritional needs were met. When people were unwell, they were supported to see a variety of health and social care professionals.

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.

People, their loved ones and professionals described staff as “Kind”, “Caring” and “Friendly.” One professional said, “Staff are wonderful, and people very well looked after.” A relative said, “I am very pleased with staff. They are so lovely and work so hard.” The atmosphere in the home was warm, friendly and homely. Staff were mindful of always respecting people’s dignity and privacy. They listened to people’s views and respected their choices about their care. Independence was continually promoted and encouraged by staff.

Significant improvements had been made to activities since the previous inspection. These were tailor-made to people’s preferences and interests and encouraged people to be involved with the community. People told us they enjoyed going out and the various external activity professionals that visited. Staff knew people’s communication needs well and supported them with a variety of person-centred tools. People knew how to complain if they needed to and were given a variety of ways to do so. When people were at the end of their life, staff supported them in a kind and caring way.

Improvements had been made to quality audit processes to ensure good oversight of the service. People, their relatives, professionals and staff felt the service was well-led. They described the registered manager and deputy manager as “Bubbly”, “Very nice”, “Enthusiastic” and, “Welcoming.” Staff told us they had worked hard as a team to overcome difficulties and felt proud of the service it had become. Management were passionate about people’s experiences and sought feedback to improve.

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

Rating at last inspection (and update)

The last rating for this service was requires improvement with one breach of regulation. (Published August 2018). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

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.