Northbrook Care Home

About the service

Northbrook Care Home is a residential care home providing accommodation with personal care for up to 5 people living with a learning disability. At the time of this inspection, 5 people were living at the service. People living in the home have their own bedrooms and there are shared communal spaces, including lounges, a kitchen and a garden area. The building was over 2 floors.

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

Right Support

Staff had completed mandatory training to perform their role effectively. Staff were supported through regular supervision. The home was an ordinary house close to other residential and commercial properties, at the heart of the local community. People were supported to eat a balanced diet and were able to choose what they ate. People had access to health care professionals. Care plans were in place for people, which set out how to meet their needs in a person-centred way. Information was provided to people in a way that was accessible to them. Systems were in place for dealing with complaints. People were supported to maintain relationships with family and friends, and to engage in meaningful activities.

Right Care

Risk assessments were in place to ensure people received safe care. Medicines were being managed safely. People were protected from the risk of abuse. There were enough staff working at the service to support people safely. The provider had robust staff recruitment practices in place. Infection control and prevention systems were in place. Accidents and incidents were reviewed to see if any lessons could be learnt from them. People told us staff were caring and that they treated people with respect. Staff understood how to support people in a way that promoted their privacy, independence and dignity. The service sought to meet people's needs in relation to equality and diversity.

Right culture

Quality assurance systems were in place to ensure shortfalls could be identified and action taken to ensure people were safe at all times. People were at the heart of what the service did. Relatives and staff told us there was an open and positive culture at the service. People were supported to express their views. 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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for the service was Good, published on 25 April 2018.

Why we inspected

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

Follow up

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

Northbrook Care Home is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to four people with learning disabilities and mental health support needs. At the time of our inspection three people were living at the home.

The home 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 members had received training in safeguarding of adults, and were able to demonstrate their understanding of what this meant for the people they were supporting. They were knowledgeable about their role in ensuring that people were safe and that concerns were reported appropriately.

Medicines at the service were well managed. People’s medicines were managed and given to them appropriately and records of medicines were well maintained.

We saw that staff at the service supported people in a caring and respectful way, and responded promptly to meet their needs and requests. There were enough staff members on duty to meet the needs of the people using the service.

The service was meeting the requirements of The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Information about capacity was included in people’s care plans. Staff members had received training in MCA. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard authorisations had been applied for and received where people had been identified as being unable to make decisions.

Staff who worked at the service received regular relevant training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. Appropriate checks took place as part of the recruitment process to ensure that staff were suitable for the work that they would be undertaking. All staff members received regular supervision from a manager and those whom we spoke with told us that they felt well supported.

We saw that the meals provided to people were healthy and varied. Alternatives were offered where people chose to eat other foods, and drinks and snacks were available to people throughout the day.

Care plans and risk assessments were person centred and provided detailed guidance for staff around meeting people’s needs. Picture assisted easy read versions had been developed for people.

The service provided a range of activities for people to participate in throughout the week. People were supported to take holidays away from the home. Staff members supported people to participate in activities of their choice. People’s cultural, religious and social needs were supported by the service and detailed information about these was contained in people’s care plans.

The service had a complaints procedure that was provided in an easy read format. People told us that they would tell the manager or staff member if they were unhappy about anything.

Regular quality assurance checks took place. Where actions were identified as a result of these they were quickly addressed.

People’s health needs were regularly reviewed. The service liaised with health professionals to ensure that people received the support that they needed.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had met legal requirements and to confirm that they now followed their action plan and made improvement to the service. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Northbrook Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Northbrook Care Home is a small home providing accommodation and personal care for up to four people with learning disabilities and mental health support needs. At the time of our inspection, four people were using the service. Each person using the service had their own room with a hand wash basin, toilet and a shower and shared a lounge. The service did not have a registered manager in place at the time of this inspection because the previous registered manager had left the service and was deregistered. The provider had employed a new manager who was yet to apply to register with the Care Quality Commission.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 told us staff administered their medicines. We found that medicines were administered and recorded by staff as prescribed by healthcare professionals. Staff signed Medicine Administration Record Sheets (MARS) to confirm that the medicines were administered. We noted there were protocols for managing medicines and it was evident that medicines were audited. This ensured that errors in medicine administration were identified and appropriate action taken.

A mobile ramp was provided to enable people with mobility needs to access the back garden. The provider confirmed that risk assessments would be completed by an occupational therapist to ensure people could use the mobile ramp safely. We saw that activities were planned and provided to people. Care files showed people's needs were reviewed with their involvement and staff provided personalised care that reflected the needs and preferences of people.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People were put at risk because some care workers were not appropriately checked if they were suitable to work with people who used the service. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff had been provided with safeguarding training. We observed the way staff communicated with the people using the service and saw they treated people with respect and dignity.

Is the service effective?

The care plan review system was not effective because there was no evidence that people who used the service or their representatives were involved. Also risk assessments were not effective as potential risks to people were not always identified and included in the risk assessments. Staff knew people’s likes and dislikes and were able to meet their needs.

Is the service caring?

Staff were caring and attentive to people’s needs. People received individualised care and support. The service had a key working arrangement which meant each person who used the service had a named care worker who was responsible for and ensuring of meeting their needs.

Is the service responsive?

Arrangements were made for people to attend medical appointments and social activities. The provider worked with healthcare professionals, for example, General Practitioners, to ensure people’s medical needs were met.

Is the service well-led?

The home had a registered manager and a deputy manager. Regular staff supervision and staff meetings took place to ensure that staff had up-to-date information about the policies and procedures of the home. There was a medication auditing system and other regular health and safety checks which would assist the manager to identify and address risks.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Staff had been trained to support people in protecting themselves and knew what action to take to protect people. Staff held professional qualifications and were encouraged to take up training. They felt supported in their work.

There were sufficient staff to meet the needs of people who use the service. The management team monitored the quality of the service provided and had implemented changes to the delivery of care when required.

You can see our judgements on the front page of this report.