Archived: Berkeley Court

Updated 21 May 2016

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.

This inspection took place on 24 February 2016 the visit was unannounced. One adult social care inspector, and inspection manager, a pharmacist inspector, a specialist advisor in social work with medical and health expertise and an expert-by-experience who had experience of older people’s care service and dementia care carried out the inspection. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection providers are asked to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We did not ask the service to provide us with a PIR prior to this inspection. We also reviewed all the information we held about the service, and contacted the local authority and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

At the time of our inspection there were 74 people using the service. During our visit we spoke with 16 people who used the service, five visitors, seven members of staff, the registered manager and a registered manager from the registered provider’s other home. We observed how people were being cared for, and looked around areas of the home, which included some people’s bedrooms and communal rooms. We spent time looking at documents and records that related to people’s care and the management of the home. We looked at eight people’s care plans.

Updated 21 May 2016

This inspection took place on 24 February 2016. At the last inspection in July 2015 we rated the service as requires improvement. We found the provider was breaching two regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014. People were not always protected against the risks associated with medicines and the provider did not have effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service delivery. At this inspection we found the registered provider had taken action in both areas.

Berkeley Court provides care and support for up to 78 older people. At the time of our inspection there were 74 people using the service. The accommodation for people is arranged over three floors. There are two units per floor. Each unit has single bedrooms which have en-suite facilities. There are communal bathrooms and toilets throughout the home. There are open plan communal lounges and dining rooms on each of the units.

The registered provider had a recruitment procedures were in place. However we found the registered provider did not always follow their policy and procedures. We found one person’s reference in their file did not match the references on their application form or previous employment history on their application form

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

When we looked in staff files we found evidence that showed some staff had not received individual supervision. We also found staff annual appraisals had not taken place. This meant staff were not appropriately supported in relation to their roles and responsibilities which may affect the delivery of care.

Records we looked at showed staff training was not fully up to date. This meant staff were at risk of not being able to perform their duties safely or appropriately.

People who used the service told us they were happy living at the service. They said they felt safe and staff treated them well. Staff told us they respected people’s choice and treated them with dignity and respect.

Care records did not show how people who used the service were involved in the planning their care and there were also limited ends of life care plans. Relatives told us they were consulted about their family member’s care.

.

People were encouraged to maintain good health and received the support they needed to do this. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines when they needed it. People’s views on food and menus in the home were good. We saw people received regular drinks and snacks to make sure their nutrition and hydration needs were met.

People who used the service were involved in a wide range of activities within the home. Most people we spoke with said they enjoyed these.

Staff spoke positively about the registered manager of the home saying they were approachable. The home had systems in place to deal with concerns and complaints, which included providing people with information about the complaints process. Information on how to complain was clearly displayed in the home, giving people the contact details they needed if they wished to do so.

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service; which included regular audits of the home.

Breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014 were found during this inspection. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the end of this report.