Burrows House

¿ There were effective systems in place to manage the spread of inspection. Visitor’s temperatures were checked on arrival, and asked a screening questionnaire to ensure they were safe to enter the service.

¿ Staff wore appropriate PPE and government guidance regarding social distancing was adhered to at all times.

¿The service had been effectively zoned to ensure that the area used as the designated setting for COVID-19 discharge was appropriately separate, including with separate entrances and exits.

¿ The provider had paved a separate outside area to allow people using the designated setting to sit outside.

¿ Staff working in the designated setting had a separate break area, and the registered manager had ensured they had access to tea and coffee making facilities, a fridge and a microwave.

We were assured that this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines as a designated care setting.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

During our last inspection in May 2017, we found that improvements were needed as prescribed medicines were not stored securely. We found that Medicine Administration Records (MAR) for topical creams were either not signed or not completed as soon as the medicines were administered. We also found that the providers quality assurance systems had not picked up the issues we found at that inspection. At this inspection we found that the provider had acted to address these issues.

Burrows House is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing, or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Burrows House accommodates up to 54 people. There were 47 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in place, who was supported by a deputy 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.

People told us they felt safe. There were appropriate whistleblowing and adult safeguarding procedures in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. Staff understood the types of abuse that could occur and the action to take if they had any concerns. Risks to people were assessed, identified and safely managed. The home had a system in place to record accidents and incidents and acted on them in a timely manner. Medicines were stored, administered, managed safely and accurate records were maintained. People were protected from risk of infection as staff followed practices that reduced the risk of infection. There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs in a timely manner and the provider followed safe recruitment practices.

Staff received an induction when they started work at the home and were supported through regular training and supervisions so that they were effectively able to carry out their roles. People's needs were assessed prior to moving into the home to ensure their needs could be met. The registered manager and staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). 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. Staff told us they asked for people’s consent before offering support. People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and had access to healthcare professionals when required to maintain good health.

People told us staff were caring, considerate and respected their privacy, dignity and independence. They said staff involved them in making decisions about their daily care and support requirements. People were provided with information about the service when they joined in the form of a 'service user guide' so they were aware of the services and facilities on offer.

People’s care plans were reflective of their individual care needs and preferences and care plans were reviewed on a regular basis. A variety of activities were on offer and available for people to enjoy and take part in. People were aware of the home’s complaints procedures and knew how to raise a complaint. People's cultural needs and religious beliefs were recorded and they were supported to meet their individual needs. Where appropriate people had their end of life care wishes recorded in care plans.

The provider had effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Regular staff and residents' meetings were held and feedback was also sought from people about the service through annual surveys. Staff were complimentary about the registered manager and the home. The provider worked in partnership with the local authority to ensure people’s needs were planned and met.

Burrows House is registered to provide accommodation and care for up to 54 elderly people including people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 53 people living at the home.

There was 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.

During our inspection we found that improvements were needed as prescribed medicines were not stored securely. We found that Medicine Administration Records (MAR) for topical creams were either not signed or not completed as soon as the medicines were administered. We found that although there were quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, the issues we found at inspection had not been identified during these audits.

People using the service said they felt safe and cared for. The home had robust safeguarding adult's procedures in place and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. Risks to people using the service were assessed and risk assessments and care plans provided clear information and guidance for staff. There were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs and the provider carried out appropriate recruitment checks before staff started work.

Staff were received appropriate training and regular supervision. Staff asked people for their consent before they provided care, and they demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People received food and drink suitable to their needs and had access to healthcare when they needed it.

People and relatives said staff looked after them in a way which was kind, caring and respectful. Staff knew how to protect people’s privacy and dignity. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible, when carrying out activities and tasks.

People and their relatives were involved in their care planning. Care plans were reflective of people's individual care needs and preferences and were reviewed on a regular basis.

People's cultural needs and religious beliefs were recorded to ensure that staff took account of these areas when offering support.

People and their relatives knew about the complaints procedure and said they believed their complaints would be investigated and action taken if necessary.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the management and leadership of the service. The provider sought people's views about how the care and support people received and how it could be improved.