Archived: Briar House

Updated 24 January 2017

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 was an unannounced inspection that took place on the 7 December 2016.The inspection was carried out by one inspector who had experience in adult social care and learning disabilities.

Prior to this inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service, including information about safeguarding and statutory notifications. Statutory notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

We had asked the provider to complete 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. This information was required to see if we would need to focus on any particular areas of the home.

We spoke with two people living at Briar House. People were unable to communicate with us at length so instead we observed the care and support being provided by staff. We talked to two relatives and one healthcare professional following the inspection.

As part of the inspection we spoke with the registered manager and three members of staff. We looked at a range of records about people’s care and how the home was managed. For example, we looked at three care plans, medicine administration records, risk assessments, accident and incident records, complaints records and internal and external audits that had been completed. We looked at three staff recruitment and training development files.

Updated 24 January 2017

Briar House is a small care home that provides care and support for up to 6 people who have a learning disability, such as autism or epilepsy. The home is owned and operated by Cavendish Care who operates several homes in the Surrey area. On the day of our inspection 6 people were living in the home.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was present for the duration of the inspection.

Medicines were managed in a safe way and recording of medicines was completed to show people had received the medicines they required.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s needs and support their activities. People and staff interaction was relaxed. It was evident staff knew people well and understood people’s needs and aspirations. Staff were very caring to people and respected their privacy and dignity.

Staff received a good range of training specific to people’s needs. This allowed them to carry out their role in an effective and competent way. Staff met with their line manager on a one to one basis to discuss their work. Staff said they felt supported and told us the registered manager had good management oversight of the home.

Appropriate checks, such as a disclosure and barring record (DBS) check were carried out to help ensure only suitable staff worked in the home. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and were able to tell us what they would do in such an event and they had access to a whistleblowing policy should they need to use it.

People lived in a homely environment and were encouraged to be independent by staff. Staff supported people to keep healthy by providing people with a range of nutritious foods. Staff encouraged people as much as possible to be involved in the menu planning and shopping.

People had access to external health services and professional involvement was sought by staff when appropriate to help maintain good health.

People were encouraged to take part in a range of activities which were individualised and meaningful for people. Daily routines were flexible depending on how people felt or other activities available.

People had risk assessments in place for identified risks. The registered manager logged any accidents and incidents that occurred and put measures in place for staff to follow to mitigate any further accidents or incidents.

Staff had followed legal requirements to make sure that any decisions made or restrictions to people were done in the person’s best interests. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The registered manager and staff undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were actioned by staff.

If an emergency occurred or the home had to close for a period of time, people’s care would not be interrupted as there were procedures in place to manage this.

A complaints procedure was available for any concerns. This was displayed in a format that was easy for people to understand. People and their relatives were encouraged to feedback their views and ideas into the running of the home.