Archived: Brighton & Hove Bethesda Home

We undertook this unannounced comprehensive inspection to look at all aspects of the service and to check that the provider had made the required improvements. We found improvements had been made. The overall rating for Brighton & Hove Bethesda Home remains as ‘good’.

Brighton & Hove Bethesda Home is located in Hove. It provides accommodation with personal care and support to 22 older people, some of whom were living with varying stages of dementia, along with healthcare needs such as diabetes and sensory impairment. One of the conditions of residency is that residents are members of the Gospel Standard Churches, or that they regularly attend their chapels. The service is set over one floor. On the day of our inspection, there were 15 people living at the service.

Brighton & Hove Bethesda Home belongs to the organisation the Gospel Standard Bethesda Fund. The Gospel Standard Bethesda Fund is a Christian organisation standing by the distinct position of the Gospel Standard articles of faith, and aims to run its homes on Christian principles. The Gospel Standard Bethesda Fund has additional services in Harpenden, Hertfordshire and Studley, Wiltshire.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed and people told us they felt the service was safe. People remained protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.

The provider continued to have arrangements in place for the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services.

Staff considered people’s capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People felt staff were skilled to meet their needs and provide effective care. Additionally, people enjoyed taking part in meaningful and appropriate activities both in the service and the community.

People remained encouraged to express their views and had completed surveys. Feedback received showed people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People also said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed.

Staff supported people to eat and drink and they were given time to eat at their own pace. People’s nutritional needs continued to be met and they reported that they had a good choice of food and drink.

The service had a relaxed and homely feel. Everyone we spoke with spoke highly of the caring and respectful attitude of a consistent staff team and this was observed throughout the inspection.

People’s individual needs were assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support they required. People were consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.

Staff felt fully supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. People and staff found the management team approachable and professional.

We also took information from other sources to help us understand the views of people who used the service, which included resident meeting minutes.

The people we spoke with told us they were happy with the care they received and with the staff team. One person who used the service told us, 'The carers here are very helpful and look after me well.' Another person commented, 'The staff are marvellous and so caring. Nothing is a problem for the staff here.'

We saw that the service had systems in place to gain and review consent to care and treatment from people who used the service.

The people who used the service were supported to have adequate nutrition and hydration. People were given the choice of food and drink to meet their diverse needs. One person who used the service told us, 'The cook is really good. There is a varied menu.'

We saw evidence that the provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place to ensure that staff were qualified to do their jobs.

The provider had also ensured that sufficient numbers of staff with the right skills and abilities were employed to meet the needs of the people who use the service.

We saw that people experienced safe and effective care based on detailed care plans and risk assessments that met individual needs.

People using the service were protected from abuse as they were supported by a staff team who had appropriate knowledge and training on safeguarding adults. People told us if they had any concerns they would report them to the manager of senior person on duty.

Staff we spoke to and records we reviewed, demonstrated that staff were suitably experienced and skilled to support people living in the home. One staff member told us that Bethesda 'is a great place to work' and another said that the staff team were 'really good' at supporting residents.

There were processes in place to monitor the quality of service being provided and we saw that people were involved through questionnaires and spot checks.