Archived: Brandon Lodge Care Home

We found the following examples of good practice during our inspection:

• Systems were in place to prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infections.

• Although no visits were taking place at the time of inspection due to an outbreak of COVID-19, visits had been facilitated with appropriate measures in place.

• Staff supported people's emotional wellbeing. People and their relatives were supported to keep in contact using a range of technology.

• Additional cleaning of all areas and frequent touch surfaces was being carried out regularly.

• People were supported to understand the pandemic and the need for infection prevention and control (IPC) measures, such as staff wearing face masks.

• People and staff participated in a regular testing programme.

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

Assessments were not always carried out in a timely manner and changes in people’s needs was not always communicated to staff who needed the information. These issues had not formed part of the current audits and so had not been identified. The registered manager put solutions in place to address the matter immediately.

People told us they felt safe at the service. Risks to people were identified and managed. Health and safety checks were carried out regularly ensuring people had a safe environment. The provider continued to follow safe recruitment practices and ensured people were protected against the employment of unsuitable staff. Sufficient staff were deployed to meet people’s care and support needs.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and supported people to be as independent as possible. People were supported by staff who knew them well. We observed kind and affectionate interactions between staff and people.

Staff were motivated to provide good personalised care, treating people as individuals. People and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager and care staff. Staff worked well together and were happy working at the service.

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 and relatives told us they knew how to complain but had no concerns. The service regularly sought feedback from people, relatives and healthcare professionals.

The provider used information from complaints, safeguarding concerns and accidents and incidents to drive improvement and to learn when things went wrong.

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 29 March 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.

Brandon Lodge Care Home provides care and accommodation for up to 38 people with nursing and residential care needs. On the day of our inspection there were 36 people using the service.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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. At the time of our inspection, the registered manager for Brandon Lodge Care Home had recently left the service and the deputy manager was in charge. The deputy manager told us a new manager had been appointed but hadn’t started work at the home yet.

We last inspected the service in February 2015 and rated the service as ‘Good’, however the Safe domain was rated ‘Requires improvement’ due to insufficient numbers of staff on duty. At this inspection we found the service was ‘Good’ in all areas and met all the fundamental standards we inspected against.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and risk assessments were in place. The registered provider had a safeguarding adults policy in place and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the administration and storage of medicines.

The home was clean, spacious and suitable for the people who used the service and appropriate health and safety checks had been carried out.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service. The registered provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff.

Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

The registered provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and was following the requirements in the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People were protected from the risk of poor nutrition and staff were aware of people’s nutritional needs. Care records contained evidence of visits to and from external health care specialists.

People who used the service and family members were complimentary about the standard of care at Brandon Lodge Care Home.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence. Care plans were in place that recorded people’s plans and wishes for their end of life care.

Care records showed that people’s needs were assessed before they started using the service and care plans were written in a person centred way.

Activities were arranged for people who used the service based on their likes and interests and to help meet their social needs.

The registered provider had an effective complaints procedure in place and people who used the service, family members and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service.

We asked people if they were asked for their consent to care and treatment. Comments included 'They always ask before they do anything' and 'They don't just tell me what they're going to do, they always ask first.'

People told us, without exception, they were happy with the care provided. Comments included 'The care is gold standard, they go the extra mile for you', 'The staff are a great lot, it couldn't be better', 'The staff are all lovely' and 'I wanted my relative to come here as it is the best for care.'

Most people were satisfied with staffing levels. One person said 'If I press the button they come straight away.' Another said 'The staff are very good here, they are as quick as they can be.'

We found the provider requested feedback from people who used its services, relatives and staff, and took action to address any concerns.

We found records were up to date and securely held.