Bainbridge Court

Updated 16 November 2018

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 is 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.

The inspection was a comprehensive inspection which took place on 1 October 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours' notice of the inspection visit because the location was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day. We needed to be sure that they would be available to talk with us.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. We spoke to the registered manager, three members of staff, two relatives and three people who live at the home. We completed observations in communal areas, due to the nature of people's needs, we were not able to ask everyone direct questions, but we did observe people as they engaged with their day-to-day tasks and activities.

We pathway tracked the care of four people. Pathway tracking is where we check that the care detailed in individual plans matches the experience of the person receiving care. We reviewed records including; accident and incident logs, quality assurance records, compliments and complaints, policies and procedures, three positive behaviour plans and two records relating to staffing.

Before the inspection, we reviewed information relating to the home including correspondence from people, professionals, and notifications sent to us by the registered manager. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We also used information the provider sent to us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

After the inspection, we requested the registered manager send documents relating to training records, policies relating to the service and contact details for people’s relatives. The manager actioned this within the requested timeframe.

Updated 16 November 2018

Bainbridge Court is a residential 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 home is registered for eight people living with a learning disability, complex needs and autism. At this inspection on 1 October 2018, there were eight people living at the home. Accommodation is provided over two floors and people have their own rooms with an en-suite.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

At the last inspection on 19 January 2016, we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At the last inspection the home was consistently effective. At this inspection we found there was an inconsistent approach to mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions. At times best interest decisions had been made without first assessing the person's ability to make the decision for themselves.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People could make day to day choices and staff adapted their approach to enable this. People's needs were assessed prior to people moving into the home and regularly thereafter. Staff continued to have skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and support.

People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. People continued to be supported to access healthcare services as and when needed. People's needs were met by the design and adaptation of the building.

People were safe. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and there were systems and process in place to keep people safe. Staff had a flexible approach to risk management which ensured good outcomes for people. Staffing was managed particularly well; the team were well coordinated and flexible to meet the changing needs of people. Lessons were learned when things went wrong and accidents and incidents were managed safely.

People continued to be treated with kindness and respect. People had access to information in a format to help their understanding. People were supported to be involved in decisions about their care and given support to express their views. People were encouraged to make decisions where appropriate and supported to be independent. People's differences were respected and staff adapted their approach to meet people's needs and preferences.

Care continued to be personalised to meet the needs of individuals including their social and wellbeing needs. People continued to have access to activities that met their interests. Activities were an important part of people's lives and were led by people's choices. There were systems in place to deal with concerns and complaints. The registered manager responded to complaints in a timely manner and in line with the provider's policy. People had access to technology to meet their needs.

The home continued to be well-led. Relatives were complementary of the manager and staff felt well supported. The culture of the home was positive and respected people's equality, diversity and human rights. Systems and process were in place to monitor the quality of the service being delivered. Staff continued to work in partnership with other organisations to ensure people's needs are met.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.