You are here

SENSE - 138 Bradford Road Good


Review carried out on 4 November 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about SENSE - 138 Bradford Road on 4 November 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about SENSE - 138 Bradford Road, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 28 January 2020

During a routine inspection

About the service

SENSE – 138 Bradford Road is a residential care home providing personal care to 3 people living with a learning disability.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside the building to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

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

There were enough staff recruited safely to meet people’s needs and people were safeguarded from potential abuse.

People received their medicines as prescribed and infection control measures were in place.

People had access to health and social care services, and staff who were trained and supported appropriately ensured people’s nutritious intake was balanced and their ongoing health and wellbeing monitored.

Staff were kind and caring, supported people’s decisions and ensured their privacy, dignity and independence were maintained and promoted.

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.

Care plans contained good detailed person-centred information, and care plans were updated regularly to ensure people’s needs continued to be met.

People were supported to maintain social relationships and actively partake in activities relevant to their social needs and interests.

Staff were confident in the leadership of the service and the provider had a clear set of values which informed its purpose. There were good quality assurances processes in place to ensure the quality of the service delivered was continuously improving.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 28 June 2018).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection carried out on 1 June 2017

During a routine inspection

The inspection visit took place on 01 June 2017, and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours' notice of the inspection because the service was a small care home for adults who are often out during the day; we needed to be sure that someone would be in. SENSE-138 Bradford Road provides care to three adults with a sensory impairment and who may have other disabilities. The people who lived at SENSE-138 Bradford Road were supported to use local services and facilities.

At the last inspection in March 2015 the service was rated as ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The registered manager had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take appropriate action when required. Recruitment checks were carried out to ensure suitable people were employed to work at the home. Our observations and discussions with staff and relatives of people who lived at the home confirmed sufficient staff were on duty.

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people who lived at the home. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care and support people required. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported. People who received support, or where appropriate their relatives, were involved in decisions and consented to their care. People’s independence was promoted.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. We observed regular snacks and drinks were provided between meals to ensure people received adequate nutrition and hydration. Comments from relatives of people who lived at the home were all positive about the quality of meals provided. We found people had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs were met.

People who lived at the home were encouraged to participate in activities of their choice and a range of activities that had been organised. People were supported to access local community day services.

People’s relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available and people’s relatives said they were encouraged to raise concerns. The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of care and services provided at SENSE-138 Bradford Road. These included external audits, regular internal audits of the service, relative’s surveys and staff meetings to seek the views of people about the quality of care being provided.

Inspection carried out on To Be Confirmed

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on the 19 March 2015. At the last inspection in January 2014 we found the provider met the all regulations we looked at.

138 Bradford Road provides care to three adults with a sensory impairment and who may have other disabilities. The people who live at 138 Bradford Road are supported to use local services and facilities.

At the time of this inspection there was no registered manager in post. We were told a new manager had been appointed and was due to start shortly after 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 and their relatives told us they or their family member felt safe at the home. There were effective systems in place to ensure people’s safety and manage risks to people who used the service, whilst also encouraging and promoting their independence. Staff could describe the procedures in place to safeguard people from abuse and unnecessary harm. Recruitment practices were robust and thorough.

People received their prescribed medication when they needed it and appropriate arrangements were in place for the storage and disposal of medicines. Staff were trained in medicines management.

People were cared for by sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff. We saw staff received the training and support required to meet people’s needs well. Staff spoke highly of their training and said this prepared them well for their role.

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs and preferences. People had detailed, individualised support plans in place which described all aspects of their support needs and aspirations.

Staff were trained in the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005), and could describe how people were supported to make decisions to enhance their capacity and where people did not have the capacity decisions had to be in their best interests.

Health, care and support needs were assessed and met by regular contact with health professionals. People were supported by staff who treated them with kindness and were respectful of their privacy and dignity. Suitable arrangements were in place and people were supported and provided with a choice of suitable healthy food and drink ensuring their nutritional needs were met.

People participated in a range of activities both in the home and in the community and received the support they needed to help them stay in contact with family and friends. People were able to choose where they spent their time and what they did.

Staff had good relationships with the people living at the home. Staff were aware of how to support people to raise concerns and complaints and we saw the provider learnt from complaints and suggestions and made improvements to the service.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

Inspection carried out on 27 January 2014

During a routine inspection

It was not possible to speak to people who used the service due to their limited verbal communication. However, we spoke with a relative of each of the three people who lived at the home. They all described the care and support as excellent and said they were very happy with the service. They said staff were quick at identifying any health issues which concerned their relative. People�s comments included:

�Really good, consistent with care, they have developed her and she does things we didn�t think were possible before.�

�Tremendous staff, very happy, she has made real progress.�

�Very good service, she can do more for herself now, she has a good daily routine.�

We spoke with a visiting social care professional who supported one person who used the service. They told us that they thought people were well cared at the home and they did not have any concerns. They said staff were good at acting on any health problems or other incidents which occurred.

We found the provider promoted choice and independence in the care and support it provided.

We found people�s needs were assessed so appropriate care could be planned and delivered. This included care and support tailored to people�s individual needs.

The premises were of suitable design and layout and appropriate security measures were in place.

Robust recruitment procedures were in place which ensured staff were suitable for the role.

An effective complaints system was in place.

Inspection carried out on 23 July 2012

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods including observation, talking to staff and gathering information from stakeholders to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. The people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not fully able to tell us their experiences.

Inspection carried out on 17 November 2011

During a routine inspection

In view of the communication difficulties people who use the service, had, we relied on observations between the staff and people who use the service in order to understand their views of the service. We saw staff talking with people who use the service using speech and sign language about their shopping visit to buy presents for a birthday. We observed staff offering people choices about how and where they wanted to spend their time, and what food and drinks they wanted.

We spoke with two staff during our visit. Staff were very positive about working in the home and praised the teamwork and supportive atmosphere.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)