Barn Rise

Barn Rise is a residential care home providing personal care and accommodation to up to 6 people. The service provides support to people with a learning disability and autistic people. At the time of our inspection there were 5 people using the service.

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

The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of right support, right care, right culture.

Right Support: Model of Care and setting that maximises people’s choice, control and independence. Staff were recruited safely and had appropriate training on how to safeguard people using the service. The provider followed current best practice guidelines to effectively manage people's medicines and risks associated with infection prevention and control (IPC). People had individual positive behaviour management plans to guide staff when people became distressed or anxious.

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. If people lack capacity to make certain decisions appropriate support was sought to support them.

Right Care: Care is person-centred and promotes people’s dignity, privacy, and human rights. People were encouraged to communicate freely and access the community for activities when they wanted to. Staff supported people to learn new skills and maintain important contacts. People's care records were person-centred and up to date. Staff knew people well and understood their support needs which empowered people to make decisions about their care.

Right Culture: The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensure people using services lead confident, inclusive, and empowered lives. The staff team worked well together making sure people's rights and wishes were protected. The service had regular communication with the healthcare professionals and relatives which led towards good working relationships and empowered people to choose the way they wanted to live their lives. The management team led by example and people were supported to take positive risks and were supported to do more things on their own.

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 good (published 8 November 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

We undertook a focused inspection. This report only covers our findings in relation to the key questions safe, effective and well-led. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has not changed. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Barn Rise on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

At the last inspection on 29 October 2015, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Staff demonstrated clear understanding of the actions they would take if they suspected or witnessed abuse and told us that they were confident that the registered manager would deal with any allegations of abuse immediately. Risks were managed and planned appropriately. Risks were assessed and management plans were in place to minimise the risk. Medicines were managed safely and sufficient staff were deployed to ensure people’s needs were met.

Staff told us that they had access to a wide range of training, which was provided electronically or face to face. Staff felt that the training helped them to gain better understanding of how to meet people’s needs and improved the way they worked with people. Regular support was also provided in form of regularly planned supervisions and appraisals. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service support this practice. People were provided with a healthy and well balanced diet and were encouraged to take part in the preparation of meals.

During the inspection we observed people were treated with kindness and compassion. It was evident that positive caring relationships had developed between people who used the service and care staff. Relatives spoke positively about staff and the care provided at the home.

People’s health and social care needs had been appropriately assessed. Care plans were person-centred, detailed and specific to each person and their needs. Care preferences were clearly documented. People were supported to raise concerns. The service did not receive any complaints since our last inspection.

Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and the support they received from her. Staff told us that the registered manager was approachable and would listen to suggestions made in how to improve the quality of care provided. Regular review and monitoring of care ensured that the quality of care was not compromised.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Barn Rise is a care home for adults with learning disabilities, including people with autism and behaviours that challenge the service. The maximum number of people they can accommodate is six. On the day of the inspection there were six men residing at 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were safe at the home and safe with the staff who supported them. Staff were patient, kind and respectful. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet the needs of people.

The registered manager and staff at the home had identified and highlighted potential risks to people’s safety and had thought about and recorded how these risks could be reduced.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and told us they would presume a person could make their own decisions about their care and treatment in the first instance. Staff told us it was not right to make choices for people when they could make choices for themselves.

People had good access to healthcare professionals such as doctors, dentists, chiropodists and opticians and any changes to people’s needs were responded to appropriately and quickly.

People told us staff listened to them and respected their choices and decisions.

People using the service and staff were positive about the registered manager and management of the home. They confirmed that they were asked about the quality of the service and had made comments about this. The management took people’s views into account in order to improve service delivery. We saw some innovative systems of governance with the view of linking management information with the regulator in the future.

On 24 January 2014 we received confirmation from the registered provider that maintenance work and refurbishment of the premises would commence on 29 January 2014. On 2 May 2014 we received further confirmation from the registered provider that the majority of work had been completed.

The purpose of our inspection on 5 September 2014 was to assess compliance with Regulation 15(1)(c) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. On 5 September 2014 we found that the majority of re-decoration and refurbishment of the premises had been completed to high specifications and we judged the environment fit for purpose, comfortable, homely and we observed people who used the service to be satisfied with their home.

Staff followed the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for people who lacked capacity to make a decision. For example, the provider had made applications under the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards for all people who use the service.