Brackenley

Updated 29 June 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team: The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

Service and service type: This service 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 CQC. 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: The first day of our inspection was unannounced. We told the provider we would be visiting on the second day.

What we did: Before the inspection we checked information the provider had sent us about incidents that occurred and which affected their service or the people who used it. 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 (PIR). 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.

During the inspection we spoke with five people who used the service, two people’s relatives, and two healthcare professionals about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with the registered manager, chief executive officer, quality and compliance manager, and four members of staff.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment, as well as induction, training and supervision records for the staff team. We looked at meeting minutes, quality assurance audits and a selection of other records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 29 June 2019

About the service: Brackenley provides support for younger adults and older people who may be living with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder, dementia, a physical disability, sensory impairment, mental health needs or an eating disorder.

The service was registered for the support of up to 13 people, and 13 people were using the service at the time of our inspection. This is larger than current best practice guidance for a service supporting people with a learning disability. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated. The service was in a residential neighbourhood, close to local amenities, and by the building design fitted into the local area.

People’s experience of using this service:

People received kind, caring and effective support to meet their needs. 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 provider and registered manager were exceptionally committed to continually improving and developing the service to meet people’s individual needs and improve their quality of life. They promoted an open, transparent and very person-centred culture. People were at the heart of the service; management consistently recognised what was important to people and were very responsive and passionate about providing high-quality care to meet their needs. Staff praised the communication and strong leadership and were proud of the service they provided. There was high levels of engagement and a strong focus on staff development to continually improve the quality of care provided.

Staff provided effective care; they were confident in their knowledge and skills, understood people’s needs and knew how best to support them. Staff worked closely with professionals; they sought advice and guidance to make sure they provided the most effective care they could to meet people’s needs. If people were unwell, staff advocated on people’s behalf to make sure they received the medical attention they needed.

Staff were caring; they were attentive to people’s needs and provided dignified and respectful support. People told us they felt safe and praised the care and support that staff provided. Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect.

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 routinely made choices about all aspects of their care. Staff supported people to express their wishes and views and were proactive in using accessible information to help people make decisions.

People were supported to access a very wide range of meaningful activities and to pursue their hobbies and interests. People had access to a varied choice of meals and snacks were available. Staff monitored people’s needs, promoted health choices and provided support if necessary to make sure people ate and drank enough.

Supervisions and appraisals provided an opportunity for staff to reflect on their performance and identify goals for the future.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection service was rated Good (report published 24 October 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

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