Benjamin House

Updated 1 September 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 checked 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.

We visited Benjamin House on 4 and 5 July 2018 to carry out an unannounced comprehensive inspection. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the service, including notifications and previous inspection reports. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We contacted the local authority contract monitoring team, the local authority safeguarding team, commissioners of care and care coordinators for their feedback about the service. The provider sent us a 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. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during the inspection.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. During the inspection visit, we spent some time with people, observing the care and support being delivered. We talked with five people who used the service about their experiences of their care. We talked with three support workers, the interim deputy manager, the cleaner, the registered manager and a visiting care coordinator.

We looked at a sample of records, including two care plans and other related care documentation, two staff recruitment records, training records, menus, complaints records, meeting records, policies and procedures, quality assurance records and audits.

Updated 1 September 2018

We carried out an unannounced inspection of Benjamin House on 4 and 5 July 2018.

Benjamin House is a ‘care home’, which is registered to provide care and accommodation for up to 10 adults with mental ill health. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided and both were looked at during this inspection. Nursing care is not provided. At the time of our inspection, eight people were using the service.

The service was managed by a registered manager. 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.

At our last inspection in the service was rated ‘Good’ overall. However, we found the provider was in breach of one regulation of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This related to the provider not having proper oversight of Benjamin House, including a lack of effective systems for checking and improving the service. At this inspection we found sufficient improvements had been made.

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.

We found there were management and leadership arrangements in place to support the effective day to day running of the service. The registered manager had made some improvements and the provider was monitoring the service.

People told us they felt safe at the service. Staff were aware of the signs and indicators of abuse and they knew what to if they had any concerns. Staff had received training on supporting people safely and abuse and protection matters.

Processes were in place to make sure all appropriate recruitment checks were carried out before staff started working at the service.

There were enough staff available to provide care and support; we found staffing arrangements were flexible and kept under review. Systems were in place to support ongoing staff training and development.

There were some good processes in place to manage and store people's medicines safely. We found some improvements were needed with record keeping, this was put right during the inspection.

Systems were in place to maintain a safe environment for people who used the service and others. Processes were in place to maintain hygiene standards and the areas we saw looked were clean.

Arrangements were in place to gather information on people’s needs, abilities and preferences before they used the service. They were encouraged to visit, to meet with other people and staff.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and processes at the service supported this practice.

We found people were effectively supported with their healthcare needs and medical appointments. Changes in people’s health and well-being were monitored and responded to. People were offered opportunities and encouragement with physical exercise.

People were satisfied with the meals provided at Benjamin House. People were actively involved with planning menus, which meant they could make choices on the meals provided.

People made positive comments about the care and support they received from staff. We observed positive and respectful interactions between people who used the service and staff.

Each person had a care plan, describing their individual needs and choices. This provided guidance for staff on how to provide support. People had been involved with planning and reviewing their care.

People’s privacy, individuality and dignity was respected. They were supported with their hobbies and interests, including activities in the local community and keeping in touch with their relatives and friends. People had opportunities for skill development and confidence building.

There were processes in place for dealing with complaints. There was a formal procedure to manage, investigate and respond to people’s complaints and concerns. People could also express concerns or dissatisfaction during their care reviews and during ‘house meetings.’

There were systems in place to consult with people who used the service and staff, to assess and monitor the quality of their experiences. Various checks on quality and safety were completed regularly.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.