We carried out a review of the data available to us about Burham Court on 6 July 2023. 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 Burham Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Burham Court is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to people with learning disabilities and autism.
Not everyone using Burham Court receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. There were two people receiving support with personal care.
At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
The service had a registered 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. The registered manager was also the provider.
Risks were appropriately assessed and mitigated to ensure people were safe. Medicines were managed safely. Records evidenced that people had received their medicines as prescribed.
Effective systems were in place to enable the provider to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.
People were very happy with their care and support. Staff had built up good relationships with people.
Health and social care professionals were complimentary about the service people received.
There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs. The provider operated safe and robust recruitment and selection procedures to make sure staff were suitable and safe to work with people.
Staff knew what they should do to identify and raise safeguarding concerns.
People were encouraged to make their own choices about everyday matters.
People's care plans clearly detailed their care and support needs. People were fully involved with the care planning process including identifying triggers, signs and actions to address their mental health needs.
People were encouraged and supported to engage with activities that met their needs. People accessed their local community with staff support.
People had choices of food at each meal time. One person was supported to purchase their own food and to manage a weekly budget for this. Another person received most of their meals with support from their relatives. However staff provided support for the person to have build up milkshake drinks to help them maintain or build up their weight. People were supported and encouraged to have a varied and healthy diet which met their cultural needs.
People were supported and helped to maintain their health and to access health services when they needed them.
Staff were cheerful, kind and patient in their approach and had a good rapport with people. The atmosphere in the service was calm and relaxed. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. The service was small and homely.
People were supported to maintain their relationships with people who mattered to them.
People knew who to talk to if they were unhappy about the service. Complaints had been handled effectively.
Staff were positive about the support they received from the management team. They felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to. Health and social care professionals provided positive feedback about the service.
Burham Court is registered to provide personal care. It is a domiciliary care service and at the time of the inspection there were 2 people receiving support.
There was a registered manager employed at the service. 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.
At the last comprehensive inspection, the service was rated Good overall and Requires Improvement in the 'Safe' domain.
We had carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 17 February 2016. A breach of legal requirements was found. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breach of Regulation 19 of the Health and Social Care Act Regulated Activities Regulations 2014, Fit and proper persons employed. The provider told us they would meet the regulation by 28 April 2016. We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements and those required in Safe domain. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Burham Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk
Why the service is now rated as Good in the safe domain.
People told us they felt safe whilst being cared for by the staff that helped them when they need support.
Effective recruitment procedures were now in place to ensure that staff employed were of good character and had the skills and experience needed to carry out their roles.
People received their medicines safely and when they should. There were systems in place to manage medicines safely.
Risks associated with people’s care and support were assessed and staff took steps to keep people safe and healthy whilst enabling their independence as much as possible.
Staff knew how to recognise and respond to abuse. They had received training on how to keep people safe.
Accidents and incidents were recorded and appropriate action taken to reduce the risk of further occurrences.
Staff had received infection control training and were clear on their responsibility in preventing cross infection when caring for people.
People had their needs met by sufficient numbers of staff and staff rotas were based on people’s needs and health appointments.
Burham Court provides services for younger adults, including people learning, autism and physical disabilities. They provide personal care to people in their own home and support people in the community. The agency provides care for people in the Medway and Maidstone areas. The service provided care to three people in their own homes, one person received care on alternate weekends, another person was provided support on week days and the third person received twenty four hour support and care seven days a week.
The service had a registered 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.
The service provided care to three people in their own homes, one person received care on alternate weekends, another person was provided support on week days and the third person received twenty four hour support/care? seven days a week.
Recruitment processes in place were not being followed by the registered manager, in all cases. On one file view we did not see a police check carried out by the service.
Staff had received training relevant to their roles. Staff had the opportunity to discuss their performance during one to one supervision meetings and had an annual appraisal that discussed their future development and possible further vocational training.
People were protected against the risk of abuse. All staff were trained and recognised the signs of abuse or neglect and what to look out for. Both the registered manager and staff understood their role and responsibilities to report any concerns and were confident in doing so.
Risk assessments were detailed and gave staff guidance about any action staff needed to take to make sure people were protected from harm.
There were suitable numbers of staff on shift to meet people’s needs. People’s planned care was allocated to members of staff and at appropriate times.
People were supported to access the community regularly. People were also supported and helped to maintain their health and to access health services if they needed them.
Families told us staff were kind, caring and communicated well with them. People’s information was treated confidentially. Paper records were stored securely in locked filing cabinets.
Procedures, training and guidance in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was in place which included steps that staff should take to comply with legal requirements.
People’s view and experiences were sought through review meetings and through surveys. People’s views about the service they received were positive.
People were supported to be as independent as possible. Families told us that the service was well run. Staff were positive about the support they received from the registered manager. They felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to.
Audit systems were in place to ensure that care and support met people’s needs.
Communication between staff within the service was good. They were made aware of significant events and any changes in people’s support needs.
We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in relation to staff recruitment. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.