You are here

Archived: ExtraCare Charitable Trust Berryhill Village Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 31 December 2016

This inspection was carried out on 17 August 2016. The inspection was announced 48 hours before we visited. This was to establish if people living at the service would be available to talk with us.

The ExtraCare Charitable Trust, Berryhill Retirement Village enables older people to rent a home, have access to personal care and support, and a range of social opportunities.

At our last comprehensive inspection of this service in July 2013, we found the provider had met all of their legal requirements.

The home had a registered manager who had recently joined the service in June 2016. 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 told us they received their care at the allocated call times and staff stayed the agreed length of time to provide the care and support needed. We also found staff were available if people required additional personal care due to their change in needs. Recruitment procedures made sure staff were of a suitable character to care for people safely in their homes.

People and relatives told us they felt people were safe at Berryhill Retirement Village. The manager and staff understood how to protect people they supported from abuse and when to inform the relevant agencies of any concerns. Staff followed people’s individual risk assessments to ensure they minimised any identified risks to people’s health and social care.

Medicines were stored and administered safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. Audits were carried out of medicines to ensure they were managed in line with good practice guidelines. People were supported to attend health care appointments when they needed to maintain their health and wellbeing.

Staff were kind and supportive to people’s needs and people’s privacy and dignity was respected. People were encouraged to be independent as much as possible with their personal care needs.

People received a nutritious diet, had a choice of food, and were encouraged to have enough to drink. Some people received support from staff to prepare their meals in their flats. People received care and support which was tailored to their individual needs.

The management and staff teams understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and supported people in line with these principles. People were supported to make everyday decisions themselves, which helped them to maintain their independence.

People were supported to pursue their hobbies and interests both within and outside the village. Activities were arranged according to people’s individual preferences, needs and abilities and staff were keen to explore a variety of new activities for people. People who lived at Berryhill Retirement Village were encouraged to maintain links with friends and family who visited them in their flats.

People and relatives knew how to make a formal complaint and were able to discuss concerns they had with staff and the registered manager. The provider obtained the views of people by way of regular meetings and customer surveys.

Staff felt the management team were supportive and promoted an open culture within the service. Staff were able to discuss their own development in supervision sessions and during regular team meetings. A programme of training and induction provided staff with the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff felt well supported by the provider and management team and their views and ideas were encouraged on how to improve the service.

The provider carried out regular audits to continually monitor and improve the quality of the service.

Inspection areas



Updated 31 December 2016

The service was safe.

People told us they were safe because they received support from staff that understood the risks related to people’s care and supported people safely. Staff knew how to safeguard people from harm and there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. The provider’s recruitment procedures reduced the risks of unsuitable staff being employed by the service.



Updated 31 December 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had received appropriate training to help them undertake their work effectively including a comprehensive induction for new staff. People were supported to access a variety of healthcare services to maintain their health and wellbeing. Staff were aware of their responsibilities regarding the Mental Capacity Act. People received a nutritious diet and had enough to drink.



Updated 31 December 2016

The service was caring.

People told us staff were kind and caring. People were involved in decisions about the support they received and their independence was encouraged and promoted. Staff were aware of people’s preferences and respected their privacy and dignity.



Updated 31 December 2016

The service was responsive

People were involved in the assessment and planning of their care, and their care needs were reviewed when necessary. People felt able to contact the provider if they had any concerns and knew how to make a complaint. People had access to a range of activities in order to pursue their hobbies and interests.



Updated 31 December 2016

The service was well-led

There was a culture of openness and transparency and a desire to continually improve the service. The management team and staff encouraged open communication with people and their relatives. Staff felt supported by the provider and management team. The provider carried out audits and checks to monitor and improve the service.