You are here

Archived: Lebrun House Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 9 August 2019

About the service

Lebrun House is a residential care home that was providing personal care for up to 20 older people, some living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, 17 people were using the service. One of these people was staying at the service on a short-term basis, otherwise known as respite.

Lebrun House is situated over three floors, with several large communal areas for people to use. This included a lounge, dining-room and conservatory. There was also a garden that we saw people enjoying throughout the inspection. Some bathrooms had been adapted to support people with mobility needs.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us that staff made them feel safe. A relative told us, “The place is secure but it's discreet. You don't feel that people are locked away. They are supported to go out all the time. And staff really know what they’re doing.” There were enough staff and if people’s needs changed, more staff were provided. Risks to people were identified, regularly reviewed and well documented so that staff knew what was expected of them to keep people safe. The building was maintained with a number of health and safety checks from safe and external professionals. People received their medicines safely from trained and competent staff.

Since the previous inspection, significant improvements had been made to staff training and the environment. Staff received training that was specific to people’s needs, such as dementia, diabetes and epilepsy. A relative said, “My loved one is well looked after, and their needs met thoroughly and with love.” Improvements had been made to the environment to ensure that it was dementia friendly. This included clear signage so that people could move around the building without getting confused. People were complimentary about the food at Lebrun House and their nutritional needs were met. When people were unwell, they were supported to see a variety of health and social care professionals.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People, their loved ones and professionals described staff as “Kind”, “Caring” and “Friendly.” One professional said, “Staff are wonderful, and people very well looked after.” A relative said, “I am very pleased with staff. They are so lovely and work so hard.” The atmosphere in the home was warm, friendly and homely. Staff were mindful of always respecting people’s dignity and privacy. They listened to people’s views and respected their choices about their care. Independence was continually promoted and encouraged by staff.

Significant improvements had been made to activities since the previous inspection. These were tailor-made to people’s preferences and interests and encouraged people to be involved with the community. People told us they enjoyed going out and the various external activity professionals that visited. Staff knew people’s communication needs well and supported them with a variety of person-centred tools. People knew how to complain if they needed to and were given a variety of ways to do so. When people were at the end of their life, staff supported them in a kind and caring way.

Improvements had been made to quality audit processes to ensure good oversight of the service. People, their relatives, professionals and staff felt the service was well-led. They described the registered manager and deputy manager as “Bubbly”, “Very nice”, “Enthusiastic” and, “Welcoming.” Staff told us they had worked hard as a team to overcome difficulties and felt proud of the service it had become. Management were passionate about people’s experiences and sought feedback to improve.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection (and update)

The last rating

Inspection areas



Updated 9 August 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 9 August 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 9 August 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 9 August 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 9 August 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.