We carried out a review of the data available to us about Brickbridge House 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 Brickbridge House, you can give feedback on this service.
Brickbridge House is a residential care home providing personal care for up to seven younger adults with learning disabilities and autism. The home accommodates six people in one house and one person in a separate building. Seven people were living at the home at the time of the inspection.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People felt the service was safe and enjoying living at Brickbridge House. Staff demonstrated a good understanding about people’s safety and were aware of how to reduce the risk of harm. There were enough staff to support people both within and away from the home. Staff were safely recruited. Accidents and incidents were reviewed to ensure learning took place and future risk was minimised.
The service was well-led. People, staff and professionals spoke positively about the registered manager. People were given opportunity to feedback about the care they received and staff felt the management team were approachable. Quality monitoring systems included audits, observations of staff practice and checks on the environment. Action was taken to rectify any areas of concern.
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 good (published 17 January 2018).
Why we inspected
To assure ourselves the service was meeting people’s needs, that staff had the necessary skills and experience and the management processes were effective we completed a focused inspection. We reviewed the key questions of Safe and Well Led only.
We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other Key Questions. We therefore did not inspect them. Ratings from previous comprehensive inspections for those Key Questions were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Brickbridge House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
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.
Brickbridge house is a residential care home providing personal care to six people at the time of the inspection. The service is registered to support seven people across two adapted buildings.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.
As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.
The service used some restrictive intervention practices as a last resort, in a person-centred way, in line with positive behaviour support principles.
People could be assured they received their medicines as prescribed. We have made a recommendation about covert medication. Systems were in place to keep people safe from the risk of potential abuse. Risks were assessed and planned for and staff were safely recruited. People were protected from the risk of potential cross infection and lessons were learned when things had gone wrong.
People had their needs assessed and guidance was in place for staff to follow where people had specific health needs. Staff received training to support people effectively and worked with other agencies to provide consistent care. People were supported to eat and drink enough and had access to healthcare services when necessary.
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 treated well by caring staff and were able to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their care. People had their privacy respected and independence promoted.
People received personalised care, responsive to their needs by staff who knew them well and were supported to follow interests and take part in activities that were socially relevant to them. The service was meeting people’s communication needs and people felt able to complain should they wish to.
The service was person-centred and engaged people, considering their equality characteristics. The registered manager was aware of their duty of candour and staff were clear about their roles. The provider offered staff the opportunity to progress in their roles and the registered manager worked in partnership with others.
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 www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 25 March 2017).
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.
There was a registered manager in post. 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 continued to be supported in a safe way and where risks to people were identified they were managed effectively. Staff knew what abuse was and how to recognise and report it. Medicines were managed safely and people had their medicines at the prescribed times. There were enough staff available to offer individual support to people and recruitment process ensured they were suitable to work within the home. Staff had received an induction and training to help them support people.
When needed capacity assessments had been completed and decisions made in people’s best interests. When people were being unlawfully restricted this had been considered.
People were treated in a kind and caring way. Their privacy and dignity was promoted by staff and they were encouraged to be independent. They were able to make choices around their day and were offered the opportunity to participate in activities they enjoyed. People were supported to access health care professionals and health care services when needed. They were offered a choice of foods they enjoyed.
Quality monitoring checks and feedback from people who used the service was obtained to bring about changes. Staff felt listened to and were provided with the opportunity to raise concerns. There was a complaints procedure in place and this was followed by the provider.
The inspection took place 26 November 2014 and was announced. 24 hours’ notice of the inspection was given because the service is small and we needed to be sure that people were at home.
Brickbridge House is a home for six people with a learning disability. At the time of this inspection six people lived at the home.
The home had a registered manager in post. 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 who lived at the home told us they were comfortable and happy with the care and support that was provided.
Staff were aware of their responsibilities for supporting people with their safety and to reduce the risk of them coming to harm.
Staffing levels were adequate to support people with their daily choices and options.
Recruitment procedures were in place to ensure suitable people were employed.
Medication was stored securely and people were supported to have their medication at the prescribed times.
People were fully involved with developing, agreeing and reviewing their care and support requirements.
Staff had received training to ensure they were effective in their roles.
The provider recognised the requirement to work within the guidelines of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty safeguards (DoLs). Referrals were in the process of being made for people who may have there liberty restricted.
People told us they were able to choose what they wanted to eat and drink each day.
Staff were kind and considerate and respected the privacy and dignity of people who lived at the home.
People’s independence was respected and they were encouraged to continue to pursue their hobbies and interests.
The quality and safety of the home was regularly checked and improvements made when necessary.
We found that people were listened to and treated with respect. We saw that people had choices about the care they received and the way in which it was delivered. People told us and records showed that people received care and support which met their needs. One person who used the service told us: 'I like it here ' quite good really'. Another person said: 'They (the staff) are great'.
Records showed that staff were trained to protect people who used the service from the risk of abuse. Staff told us that they would not hesitate to report any suspicion of abuse. We found the staff received appropriate training, supervision and appraisals of their performance to provide people with the care and treatment they needed.
We saw that there was a formal system in place to deal with complaints. We were told and records showed that the service had not received any complaints since the last inspection.
Six people were in residence when we visited. During our visit we used different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. We spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff members, and the manager, and we spent time observing the care provided in the home. One person who used the service said, 'It's alright here; I didn't want to go out (shopping) today with the others'.
We saw staff knocking on people's doors before entering. We were told that some people liked to get up later in the morning and we saw they were supported to do this. This meant that people were respected and listened to.
People were consulted about their care, and where able, gave consent to the treatment and support they received. Relatives were told about any changes in their relative's condition.
We found that care plans and risk assessments were kept under review. This meant that people received the care they needed.
We saw the management and administration of people's medicines was undertaken safely which meant that people received their medicines as prescribed.
We looked at the recruitment procedures for staff and found that systems were in place to protect people using the service.
We saw that the service had a quality assurance system in place ensuring that people received safe and appropriate care that met their needs.