We carried out a review of the data available to us about Brendoncare Froxfield 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 Brendoncare Froxfield, you can give feedback on this service.
Brendoncare Froxfield is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care for people aged 65 and over. The service was providing care to 38 people at the time of the inspection, the service can support up to 44 people in one building across 3 separate wings. One of these wings specialises in providing care for people living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were safe. There were systems in place to safeguard people from abuse and staff received training in safeguarding. Staff knew how to raise concerns both within the service and externally.
People were cared for by staff who were recruited safely and had undergone appropriate pre-employment checks.
Medicine was received, stored and administered safely. People told us they were happy with the way the service assisted them with their medicines.
The service recorded and analysed incidents, where possible the service used this information to reduce future risk to people.
We received some feedback that people waited a long time for assistance when using their call bell. The service regularly audited the call bell response times using a report printed from the call bell system. This had been unable to identify this as some staff turned off call bells and said they would come back, this meant the report did not accurately reflect how long people waited for assistance. When we discussed this with the management team, they told us this would be addressed with care staff immediately.
People’s health and care needs were assessed in line with national guidance. Assessments included people’s spiritual, emotional and religious needs.
People were supported to have a balanced diet at the service. People they told us they enjoyed the food and were given choice. The service catered for specialised and religious diets appropriately and respectfully.
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 were supported to access healthcare support when required, the service worked closely with other healthcare professionals in order to provide effective care and treatment.
People were cared for by staff who treated them respectfully and kindly. People were supported to have maximum control and input in their care and treatment.
The service supported people to access a range of activities and social events. This included group activities and outings as well as trips for specific people designed to be their ‘perfect day’. People told us they enjoyed these.
People were supported to spend time and maintain relationships with the people that were important to them. The service held a number of in-house events to support relatives and friends to spend time with people at the service.
The service had good links with the local community and had a regular group of volunteers who visited and fundraised for the service.
The management team maintained good oversight of the service and encourage improvement and innovation within the staff team. Staff and people told us they felt the management team were accessible and supportive.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was outstanding (published 21 December 2016).
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.
The bedrooms for people who were living with dementia were situated on the white corridor and were separate from the main building. People living on this corridor had access to the main communal areas within the home. The registered manager explained they were currently looking to move away from having areas of the home named by colour as they felt it was impersonal. They were consulting with people using the service to gather their suggestions for naming the different areas of the home. There were communal lounges with dining areas on the ground floor with a central kitchen and laundry.
This inspection took place on 15 and 16 November 2016 and was unannounced. At a previous inspection which took place in November 2015 we found the provider was not meeting all of the requirements of regulations relating to the recording of people’s care needs, the safe management of medicines and the recording of mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions. We made a recommendation in relation to the effectiveness of the systems in place to monitor and evaluate the quality of the service. They wrote to us with an action plan of improvements that would be made. We found on this inspection the provider had taken all the steps to make the necessary improvements.
A registered manager was employed by the service and was present throughout our 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People and their relatives spoke positively about the care and support they received. People felt safe living at the home. People had the freedom to make daily choices regarding their day to day living. People spoke positively regarding the food choices and thought there was plenty to choose from.
We observed staff developed extremely positive caring and compassionate relationships with people. People were treated with dignity and respect and were encouraged to maintain their independence and make choices. Staff knew each person as an individual and were patient and caring in their approach when offering support. They were kind and made time for people, which included lots of laughter and where appropriate hugs.
People received personalised care and staff knew each person well, such as what made a good day for them. People were relaxed and comfortable with staff and did not hesitate to seek assistance or support when required. There was a relaxed, calm and happy atmosphere at the home with lots of smiles, fun and affectionate gestures. Care was focused on people’s wishes and preferences and people were supported to remain active.
Care plans confirmed people had access to health care professionals. Visits from health care professionals were recorded and any outcomes of these visits. Feedback from visiting healthcare professionals was extremely positive and complimentary regarding the care and support people received to meet their health needs.
Systems were in place for the safe storage, administration and disposal of medicines. Records showed people received their medicines as prescribed and in their preferred manner.
There was a strong emphasis on supporting people to eat and drink well. Staff encouraged those people who were reluctant to eat with their nutritional intake. People were supported to eat a well-balanced diet and those who were at risk of malnutrition and/or dehydration had their food and fluid intake monitored.
People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff had received safeguarding vulnerable adults training and were aware of their responsibility to report any concerns. Policies and procedures were in place to advise staff on what they should do if they had concerns. Risks were assessed and reviewed regularly and control measures were put in place to minimise the risks to people. There were effective pre-employment checks for the safe recruitment of staff, including criminal records checks and obtaining character references.
There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure people’s needs were met and they were supported to maintain hobbies and interests. We observed throughout the inspection that staff were unhurried and spent time engaging with people. People received care from staff who had the skills, knowledge and understanding needed to carry out their roles. New staff members received a comprehensive induction. Training records confirmed staff received training in a range of core subjects required by the provider.
People received a high standard of care because staff were guided by an experienced and committed management team. The staff team spoke positively about the support they received and were highly motivated and enthusiastic. They spoke about wanting to ensure people received a high standard of personalised care and spoke positively about the team work and support they got from each other to achieve this. The provider had a range of quality monitoring systems and made improvements in response to people’s feedback, the audits and in response to accidents and incidents.
People were supported to express their views. Sharing their views was on-going within the service with the purpose of raising standards and involving people in the development of the service. There was a complaints procedure in place and people had confidence in the management team that they would deal with any complaints made effectively.
The provider was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Consent to care was sought in line with legislation and guidance. Mental capacity assessments had been completed and where people had been assessed as not having capacity, best interest decision meetings had taken place.
Brendoncare Froxfield provides accommodation which includes nursing and personal care for up to 44 older people. At the time of our visit 43 people were using the service. The bedrooms are arranged over two floors. There are communal lounges with dining areas on the ground floor with a central kitchen and laundry.
A registered manager was employed by 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.
We looked at seven care plans and found some guidance did not always identify how care and support should be provided. There were also some parts of the care plans where we could not read what was written in terms of care and support required. This meant that people were at risk of not receiving the care and support they needed.
We found the service was not meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Where people were deemed as lacking capacity assessments were not always completed correctly.
Whilst there were systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service to ensure people received a high standard of care and support they had not identified some of the areas requiring improvement.
Where one person received covert medicines these were not always managed in line with the provider’s policy.
People and their relatives spoke positively about the care and support they or their relative received. People and their relatives said they felt comfortable with raising concerns and had confidence that action would be taken where appropriate.
People were supported by staff that understood how to respect people’s privacy and dignity. Staff had the knowledge and skills to carry out their roles. Staff told us they had access to training that was appropriate to their role.
The service had a clear set of values which included treating people with dignity and respect and promoting independence.
Staff knew how to identify if people were at risk of abuse and what actions they needed to take should they suspect abuse was taking place. The registered manager and nurse managers dealt with and responded to all safeguarding concerns.
People were supported to eat a balanced diet. There were arrangements for people to access specialist diets where required. There were snacks and drinks available throughout the day during our inspection.
Arrangements were in place for keeping the home clean and hygienic and to ensure people were protected from the risk of infections. During our visit we observed that bedrooms, bathrooms and communal areas were clean and tidy and free from odours.
There were plans in place to respond to emergencies such as fire. Personal fire evacuation plans had been completed for people using the service.
We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
We found that people were being well treated and there were systems in place to protect them from possible abuse. Experienced staff were available in enough numbers to be able to provide the care and support that people required.
We found that the quality of the service was being monitored and systems were in place to evaluate risks in order to meet people's health, welfare and safety needs.
We observed staff were respectful to people and met their needs, making sure they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. The home had clear procedures about how to support people when they were unwell, including how to meet one person's possible acute allergic reaction.
The home was hygienic throughout, including communally used areas, such as assisted bathrooms, and areas like the laundry.
We met with 13 members of staff, including ancillary workers, care workers, registered nurses and support staff. Staff told us they felt supported in their role. One member of staff described the provider's training programme as 'well planned'. Another member of staff told us they could talk to their line manager and 'she listens'.
People said they felt they could bring issues up with staff in the home. One person told us 'I'm sure they'd do something if we brought a problem up'. The provider had clear systems for reviewing the quality of service provided and where issues were identified, they put relevant action plans in place.
Relatives told us they were made to feel welcome in the home. A visitor said the staff were 'very patient' and we saw staff going about their work in a friendly and approachable manner.
Staff were aware of the importance of providing people with the right support, for example with pressure area care and mobility. We found, however that risk assessments and care plans were not being consistently reviewed and updated. This meant that there was a risk that people would not receive the care they required in order to meet their needs.
People told us that they felt safe in the home. Staff said they felt confident about being able to recognise abuse and report any concerns.