The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Focus Birmingham Beech House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

21 Gravelly Hill North, Erdington, Birmingham, West Midlands, B23 6BT (0121) 382 6163

Provided and run by:
Focus Birmingham

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

21 October 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 21 October 2014 and was unannounced which means that we did not tell the provider beforehand that we were coming to inspect the service. At the last inspection in June 2013 the provider was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Focus Birmingham Beech House is an adapted residential house. It provided accommodation with personal care for up to six adults who have learning disabilities and visual impairment. At the time of our inspection six people were using the service, three of whom were away visiting a day centre. There was a registered manager at this location although they were away on the day of the inspection. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People, relatives and staff told us they felt that people who used the service were safe. We saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm and observed that staff were caring and kept asking people if they needed anything. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and it was evident that staff had developed close relationships with the people who used the service because they supported them to do the things they liked and referred to people with warmth and kindness.

During our visit some members of staff received training so that they were knowledgeable about people’s needs and another member of staff was having an appraisal to review the quality of the support they provided. This ensured that staff provided effective care and support that met people’s individual needs. New staff received the appropriate training to ensure there were enough qualified and experienced staff on duty to meet people’s needs.

People were able to make choices about what they did and what they ate because they were supported by various communication methods to express their views. Staff had access to information which allowed them to understand what people’s specific expressions and gestures meant and how they should respond.

Management systems were well established. The manager monitored and learnt from incidents and concerns such as identifying how to reduce the frequency of a person’s behaviour which could be regarded as challenging. A senior manager from the provider organisation conducted regular quality checks to ensure the service was compliant with current legislation.

14 June 2013

During a routine inspection

There were six people with learning disability and visual impairment living at the home on the day of our visit; no one knew we would be visiting. We spoke to one person who lived at the home, two staff, the deputy manager, two relatives and a commissioner.

People with learning disability are not always able to tell us about their experiences so we looked at records relating to their care and observed staff caring for them. Throughout the day we saw staff communicating with each person in the way that they could understand. One staff said, 'We have worked with them for a long time and know how to communicate with them.'

We saw that choices were offered and that people's views were sought and acted upon. Staff spoken with were able to tell us about people's needs and how they ensured that people received care in a way that they preferred. A relative told us, 'Staff know what X likes to do and helps them to do them.'

We saw that people were relaxed in their environment and that systems were in place to keep people safe from harm. A relative told us, ' It's a very safe place I would not leave them there if it was not.'

We saw that a there was enough staff with up to date knowledge and skills in order to support the people who lived in the home.

There were systems in place to monitor how the home was run, to ensure people received a quality service.

11 July 2012

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. People had complex needs, and only two people were able to verbally share with us their experiences. To ensure we reflect peoples' experiences as far as possible we also spoke with the relatives of one person, with two people who visited the home in a professional capacity and we used a Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We found people were being supported in ways that were respectful to them, and compassionate. We saw staff spend time with people reassuring them, and explaining as best as possible what was going to happen, or finding out what the person would like to do.

We found that people were receiving personal care to a high standard. We saw that people had been supported to dress in a style that reflected their gender and needs. People were discreetly offered help during the day and at lunch time.

We found there were some detailed plans about people's needs, but we also found some areas, including managing unsettled behaviours that had not been well addressed. We found that people were being supported to see health care professionals, and staff had advocated and sought support for people who were at risk of not receiving the health care they needed. One relative told us how staff had supported their family member with some challenging health needs. They said,"The staff showed such dedication to (my relative) the improvement is absolutely fabulous."

We looked at the systems in place to ensure people were not placed at risk of harm or abuse. People and their relatives told us they were happy with the home and felt safe there. One relative said, "If I have any worries at all, I can just pick up the phone and ring. Thankfully that is very rare."

One relative said of the home premises, "It is like going into (my relative's) own home. It is very comfortable. It is always clean and smells fresh."

We observed staff, and looked at records about staff numbers and training. We found there were enough staff on duty, but records did not show they had received all the training they needed. People and their relatives told us they found the staff friendly and approachable. Their comments included, "I can't fault the staff, they are all so good."

We found the systems in place to monitor quality and safety were adequate, but that records showing the progress made to meet shortfalls identified in audits were not always maintained. One relative explained to us how they were invited each month to a meeting where they could be updated about the home. They told us they are also able to meet the manager or staff in private.