The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Belgrave House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

School Road, Terrington St John, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire, PE14 7SE (01945) 880087

Provided and run by:
Mr Mukesh Bouri

All Inspections

16 January 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out on 16 January 2015 and was unannounced.

The atmosphere was relaxed and friendly at Belgrave House and there were sufficient numbers of skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. People living at the service were confident when speaking with staff as well as when staff were providing support. People seemed happy with the support that staff provided

Staff had received appropriate training for their role. This included training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards so that people, who could not make decisions for themselves, were protected. Staff knew how to manage risks to promote people’s safety and independence. Staff were also supported with an induction programme on commencement of employment and had continued training.

People’s needs were assessed and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual needs. Their health was monitored and they were supported to access a range of health professionals if needed. Medicines were stored and administered safely and in line with current acceptable practice.

The environment was suitable for people living at the service and had vast grounds that provided various outdoor activities and events. There was also a building for activities that people chose to undertake on a daily basis.

The staff were friendly and attentive to people’s needs and this helped them to feel safe, well cared for and to enjoy living at Belgrave House. The staff noticed if people were not fully confident about anything and took action to support the person appropriately.

The staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and had been trained in safeguarding people. They knew what signs to look for regarding any poor treatment, knew who to report this to and what action to take.

Staff completed refresher training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills for their role. The knowledge required by staff on the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) was evident.

People who required special meals, for example regarding their culture, religion or diet, were supported appropriately by staff who had gathered information on people’s likes, dislikes and dietary requirements when the person moved into Belgrave House.

31 July 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

During this inspection visit we did not ask any person who used the service for their views about the standard and quality of their records. However, we found that they continued to be supported to live a good standard and quality of life, as we had found during our previous visit, which was carried out during 19 June 2013.

Improvements had been made to ensure that people who used the service were safer. This was because their medication records were accurate and their prescribed medication was safely stored. Records also showed that members of staff had been assessed to be competent in the safe handling of people's prescribed medication.

19 June 2013

During a routine inspection

People said that they enjoyed living at Belgrave House. They were treated with respect and were actively consulted about how they wished to spend their time.

Opportunities were created for people to live a good standard and quality of life. People enjoyed living at Belgrave House because they were able to take part in a number of social activities. They were also supported to maintain a healthy lifestyle.

People were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and inadequate hydration. Their individual dietary choices were respected. People said they liked the food and also enjoyed eating out.

All of the people that were spoken with were satisfied with how they were supported to take their prescribed medication. Medication supplies and methods to store their medication were satisfactory.

There was a sufficient number of trained staff employed to meet people's individual health and social support and care needs. People who used the service indicated that they liked and got on well with members of staff.

Some, but not all, records were of a satisfactory standard. Improvements were required regarding medication records.

13 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People who used the service had the right level of information to make a decision about their support and care, including information about their health care treatments. Systems were in place to provide 'best interest' care where appropriate.

People enjoyed living at the home. This was because they were given choices of how they wished to live and were supported to follow their agreed plan of care.

People's standard of health and welfare was maintained. Staff had access to detailed care records to ensure that they provided people with safe, appropriate and individual support and care.

The home and premises were suitable and well maintained for people to safely live there. Facilities provided took into account people's individual interests and mental health needs and valued their privacy and dignity. People told us that they liked their bedroom.

People liked the staff and engaged with them in an open way without reservation. One person considered that the staff were their, "Friends and family". There were selection and recruitment systems in place to ensure vulnerable people were protected from the risk of harm from unsuitable staff.

There was an effective complaints system in place to ensure that people had no reservation in making their concerns or complaints known. People had no cause to make a complaint but knew who to speak with if they needed to.

23 February 2012

During a routine inspection

During our visit we observed the care being provided in the home and spoke with people. Most people did not have verbal communication ability. One person with limited ability told us how happy they were in the home. This person talked about a visit by their relative and their experience during a trip out with their relative. Another person communicated to us, with the staff helping communication, how happy they were after talking on the phone to their parents.

We saw three people going independently into the home's own day centre, an activity area located in a bungalow just across the pathway from the conservatory.

We noted that people were engaged in daily activities with support from staff.