Brendoncare Mary Rose Mews

Updated 8 September 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 21 August 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection to ensure staff we needed to speak with were available and to enable the service to inform people the inspection was taking place and that they may be contacted. The inspection was completed by one adult social care inspector.

We did not ask the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) before the inspection but gathered this information at the inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection, we visited and spoke with four people and two relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with the general manager, the domiciliary care supervisor who had responsibility for the day to day running of the service and three care staff.

We reviewed records that included three people’s care plans, three staff recruitment and supervision records and records relating to the management of the service.

The service was last inspected in May 2016 when one breach of regulations was found.

Updated 8 September 2018

The inspection took place on 21 August 2018 and was announced to ensure staff we needed to speak with were available.

Brendoncare Mary Rose Mews provides extra care housing or 'Close Care' as the provider terms the service. The service is available to people who live in one of the 46 leasehold apartments located in the grounds of Brendoncare Care in Alton; if people wish to purchase a personal care service from the provider. People can also arrange personal care with external providers if preferred. At the time of our inspection 15 people were receiving personal care provided by the service.

At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the overall 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 our last inspection we rated the service requires improvement in one area, safe, where we found one breach of the regulations. At this inspection we found requirements relating to care workers had now been met. The provider was able to demonstrate they operated thorough recruitment processes.

People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse. Potential risks to people had been identified, assessed and managed so they could stay safe whilst maintaining their freedom. There were sufficient staff to provide people with their care safely. People received their medicines where required, from trained and competent staff. Staff ensured people were protected from the risk of acquiring an infection during the provision of their personal care. Processes were in place to ensure any incidents were reflected upon and relevant changes made for people’s future safety.

People’s care needs were assessed prior to the provision of their care and reviewed regularly. Staff had the appropriate skills and knowledge to provide people with effective care. Staff supported people as required to ensure they ate and drank sufficient for their needs. Staff worked both within the service and across organisations to ensure people received effective care. People were supported by staff to ensure their healthcare needs were met and healthcare professionals' guidance was followed. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People consistently reported they were treated in a kind and caring manner by staff. People were supported by staff to express their views and to be involved in decisions about their care. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity were upheld during the provision of their personal care.

People received personalised care which was responsive to their needs. People’s concerns and complaints were sought, listened to and relevant action taken. People’s views about their end of life care had been sought and staff had undertaken relevant training.

There was a clear vision for the delivery of high quality care to people and a positive culture. There were robust arrangements in place for the management and governance of the service, with a dedicated domiciliary care supervisor who managed the service day to day. The general manager’s application to become the registered manager of the service was being processed by the Care Quality Commission. People and staff were engaged and involved with the service. There were good processes in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service provided. The service worked with other agencies in the provision of people’s care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below