Archived: Brighton Lodge

Updated 1 February 2017

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.

The inspection took place on 24 November 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors. Prior to our inspection, we looked at the information we held about the service and considered any information we had received from third parties or other agencies.

During our visit we spent time looking at three people’s care plans. We also looked at four records relating to staff recruitment and training, and various documents relating to the service’s quality assurance systems. We spoke with the registered manager a senior support worker, three support workers and two domestic staff. When we arrived at the home, eight of the people who lived at the home were out on activities, they all returned during the afternoon. Not all the people who lived at the home were able to communicate verbally, and as we were not familiar with everyone’s way of communicating we were unable to gain their views; therefore we observed the care and support people received and the interactions between them and staff. Following the inspection we spoke with three relatives on the telephone to gain their feedback about the care and support their family member received at Brighton Lodge.

Updated 1 February 2017

The inspection of Brighton Lodge took place on 24 November 2016. We previously inspected the service on 7 May 2014; the service was not in breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 regulations at that time.

Brighton Lodge provides care and support for adults who are living with a learning disability. The home has a maximum occupancy of 10 people, on the day of our inspection nine people were resident at the home.

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.

We found that not all aspect s of the premises and equipment had been serviced and checked in line with current regulations and good practice. On the day of the inspection we were unable to evidence a ceiling tracking hoist had been in serviced line with the Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations 1998 (LOLER). However, after the inspection the registered manager provided us with evidence of the most recent safety check, completed during December 2016. Due to a delay in the completion of work to the gas cooker, the gas safety certificate for the home had expired, and although water temperatures in the two baths at the home were routinely checked, the temperatures of other water outlets were not monitored. This demonstrated a breach of Regulation 15 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Relatives told us they felt their family member was safe and staff were knowledgeable about the types of abuse and the actions to take in the event a person was at risk of harm or abuse.

Each of the care records we reviewed contained risk assessments, individual to each person and relevant to their care and support needs.

There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs and there was a procedure in place to reduce the risk of staff being employed who may be unsuitable to work with vulnerable people.

Staff were assessed as competent to administer people’s medicines. Systems to record the stock levels of medicines kept at the home and the administration of variable dose medicines needed to improve.

New staff completed a programme of training and induction, however there was a lack of records to evidence the training staff had completed. Supervision for staff had not been completed on a regular basis but this had been identified by the registered manager and they had taken action to address this.

Our discussions with the manager and staff showed they had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity issues relating to consent and decision making.

Care records detailed peoples preferences in regard to their meals and staff were knowledgeable about the support people needed to eat and drink sufficient amounts safely. Peoples care records also evidenced the support they received from external professionals, such as their GP.

Relatives were very positive about the good care their family member received. Staff spoke to us about the people they supported in a professional, caring and knowledgeable manner. Staff knew people well including their likes and dislikes. When we observed the interactions between staff and people who lived at the home it was friendly and inclusive, people looked relaxed in the company of staff. Staff respected people’s right to privacy and dignity, for example bathroom and toilet doors could be locked and people were able to spend time alone in their rooms if they chose to do so.

People were supported to engage in a wide range of activities and were enabled to maintain contact with family and friends.

Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s care and support needs, as well as their likes and dislikes. Care plans were reviewed and updated on a regular basis to ensure they were reflective of people’s current requirements.

Staff understood their duties and the standard expected of them whilst they were on duty. Staff were proud to work at the home and felt supported by the registered manager. There were systems in place to monitor the service provided to people, for example regular checks of peoples medicines, reviews of peoples care needs and regular staff meetings. However, these were not robust and had not identified the concerns we had noted. We have made a recommendation that the registered manager seek advice and guidance from a reputable source, regarding effective auditing systems.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.