We carried out a review of the data available to us about 182 Bromham Road on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about 182 Bromham Road, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. Bespoke communication tools in form of pictures were used when staff had to discuss with people the care and support they received and obtained their consent.
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.
People were not able to give us feedback on the quality of the service they received for various reasons. Some people could not communicate verbally or they were not confident to talk to us. We received feedback from relatives of people and a social care professional about the quality of the care people received.
Relatives felt the service people received was safe. They told us they registered manager lead by example and ensured staff were knowledgeable about people`s needs. People`s care plans were being re-developed to better reflect their needs and how staff had to meet those needs.
Staff were trained and their competency to deliver care and support people was observed by the registered manager and the deputy manager. relatives and social care professionals praised the service for putting people at the centre of their care.
The registered manager was actively recruiting to ensure that there were enough staff safely employed to meet people`s needs in a personalised way.
People`s dignity and privacy was promoted and respected by staff. Staff enabled people to maintain and develop relationships and stay safe.
People had a well-developed activity schedule and attended day care several times a week. Relatives told us they were happy with the activities provided to people but felt that there was room to improve in-house activities.
The provider`s governance systems and processes were effective and identified areas of the service where improvements were needed. The registered manager completed regular audits and ensure the service provided to people was effective and safe.
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 29 April 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.
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.
182 Bromham Road provides care and support for up to six people with Learning Disabilities and Autistic Spectrum Conditions. There were six people living at the service when we visited.
The service has 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.
Staff had been trained to recognise signs of potential abuse and how to report them. People felt safe living at the service.
There were processes in place to manage identifiable risks. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to maintain their independence.
The provider carried out recruitment checks on new staff to make sure they were fit and suitable to work at the service.
There were suitable and sufficient staff with the appropriate skills mix available to support people with their needs.
Systems were in place to ensure people were supported to take their medicines safely and at the appropriate times.
Staff had been provided with induction and ongoing essential training to keep their skills up to date. They were supported with regular supervision from the registered manager.
Staff ensured that people’s consent was gained before providing them with support.
People were supported to make decisions about their care and support needs. This was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of the guidance and followed the correct processes to protect people.
People were supported to maintain a balanced diet and were able to make choices on what they wished to eat and drink.
If required people were supported by staff to access other healthcare facilities and were registered with a GP.
Positive and caring relationships had been developed between people and staff. The staff team knew people well; and provided care and support in a caring and meaningful manner.
There were processes in place to ensure that people’s views were acted on. Where possible people were encouraged to maintain their independence and staff ensured their privacy and dignity were promoted.
Pre-admission assessments were undertaken before people came to live at the service. This was to ensure people’s identified needs would be adequately met.
A complaints procedure had been developed in an appropriate format to enable people and their relatives to raise concerns if they needed to.
There was a positive, open and inclusive culture at the service. The registered manager was transparent and visible. This inspired staff to provide a quality service.
Effective quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and to drive continuous improvements.
We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 16 July 2015. A breach of legal requirements was found. People’s risk management plans were not followed appropriately to prevent the risks of harm to people and visitors. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to Regulation 12 (2) (b) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements.
This report only covers our findings in relation to the outstanding breach of regulation. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for ‘182 Bromham Road’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk
182 Bromham Road provides a service for up to six people with a learning disability. There were six people living at the service on the day of our inspection.
The service has a manager but they had not yet been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The manager was able to show us that they had begun the registration process. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
During this inspection, we found improvements had been made to ensure people’s risk management plans were followed appropriately to prevent the risks of harm to people and visitors. Risk management plans had been reviewed and contained clear guidelines for staff to follow a consistent approach.
While improvements had been made we have not revised the rating for this key question; to improve the rating to ‘Good’ would require a longer term track record of consistent good practice. We will review our rating for safe at the next comprehensive inspection.
182 Bromham Road is a care home for up to six people with a learning disability. There were six people living in the home on the day of our inspection.
This inspection took place on 16 July 2015 and was unannounced.
The home has a manager who has not yet been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The manager was able to show us that he had begun the registration process. 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.
There were processes in place to manage identifiable risks and to support people, but they were not always consistently followed. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.
Staff had been provided with essential training and support to meet people’s assessed needs; however, they had not yet been provided with formalised training in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People’s consent to care, support and choice was not always consistently sought in line with best practice guidelines.
People were supported to eat and drink and to maintain a balanced diet. They were not always provided with the support of choice of drinks that they needed or liked.
There were quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and to continuously improve on the service delivery; however, improvements were required to ensure the submission of all legally required notifications.
Staff had been trained to recognise signs of potential abuse and keep people safe. People felt safe living at the service.
The provider carried out recruitment checks on new staff to make sure they were suitable to work at the service.
There were systems in place to ensure people were supported to take their medicines safely and at the appropriate times.
The service worked to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 key principles, which states that a person's capacity should always be assumed.
People were registered with a GP. If required they were supported by staff to access other healthcare facilities.
Positive and caring relationships had been developed between people and staff.
People were encouraged to maintain their independence and staff promoted their privacy and dignity.
Pre-admission assessments were undertaken before people came to live at the service to ensure their identified needs would be adequately met.
A complaints procedure had been developed to inform people and their relatives on how to raise concerns about the service if they needed to.
Is the service safe?
People told us they felt safe. We saw that the provider ensured people were cared for in an environment that was safe and well maintained. People's needs had been assessed, and risk assessments described how any identified risks to people were minimised. We saw that the provider took appropriate steps to deal with any incidents of abuse and to minimise the risk of abuse. People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained, and they were supported by staff who were appropriately trained and supervised.
Is the service effective?
Detailed care plans were in place, and people told us their needs were being met. Staff received training to support people with various care needs. They also sought additional support from other health and social care professionals, to ensure positive care outcomes for people using the service.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. It was clear from our observations and from speaking with the staff, that they had a good understanding of the needs of the people they supported. People told us the staff were caring. One person said, "The staff are nice."
Is the service responsive to people's needs?
We observed that staff responded promptly to people's needs. We saw that care plans had been updated when people's needs changed, and that referrals had been made to other health and social care professionals when required. The service took account of individual preferences, and people were supported to access a variety of activities of their choice.
Is the service well-led?
The service had a registered manager in post. We saw that the provider had effective systems to assess and monitor the quality of the service they provided. They regularly sought the views of people using the service and their relatives, and took account of these to improve the service.
We observed safe medication processes in the home which ensured the people who use the service received the correct medication, inside and out of the home.
We observed people in this home were at ease in the company of the staff that supported them. A wide range of activities were provided for people to participate in. Staff told us they were always looking for additional suitable activities for people.
The home's recruitment systems ensured the staff employed were suitable for their roles in the home.
The home had a complaints procedure which we observed had been adhered to. We saw that complaints had been logged, investigated and responded to correctly and in a timely fashion.