Brownrigg

Brownrigg is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to six people who are autistic or have a learning disability or mental health need. At the time of our inspection there were six people living at the service.

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 told us they enjoyed living at the service.

There were enough staff to keep people safe. Risks relating to people's care and support were assessed and mitigated and people were supported to be as independent as possible. Regular fire drills were held so people knew how to evacuate the service in an emergency. Staff were recruited safely.

People told us that staff were kind and caring. Staff treated people with respect and dignity.

People led active lives and we were shown pictures of the things they enjoyed doing, such as travelling on the bus to the seaside, visiting places in the local community and taking part in sponsored walks.

People were encouraged to access the kitchen whenever they wanted and were able to prepare their own drinks whenever they wished. They were supported to eat and drink safely.

Staff made prompt referrals to healthcare professionals when they needed additional support and advice. People told us they saw a doctor when they were unwell and received their medicines when they needed them.

Staff knew how to recognise and respond to abuse and the registered manager had reported any safeguarding concerns to the local authority.

Small concerns raised by people were documented as complaints and responded to appropriately. People told us they were happy with the support provided.

Staff received appropriate training and were supported by the registered manager to carry out their roles effectively. The registered manager completed a range of checks on the service, including care plan reviews.

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.

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.

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 8 June 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.

Brownrigg is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. On the day of our inspection there were six people living at the service.

At the last inspection on 5 August and 1 September 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People told us they felt the service was safe. One person told us, “I’m safe, yeah, I like it here”. People remained protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.

The provider continued to have arrangements in place for the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services.

Staff considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. 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. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People felt staff were skilled to meet the needs of people and provide effective care. One person told us, “I think so, yes they are [well trained]”.

People remained encouraged to express their views and had completed surveys. Feedback received showed people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed.

Staff continued to support people to eat and drink and they were given time to eat at their own pace. People’s nutritional needs remained met and people reported that they had a good choice of food and drink. One person told us, “The food is wonderful”.

Staff continued to feel fully supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. One member of staff told us, “There is lots of training available. There is no excuse not to learn”. Another member of staff said, “I get regular supervision. I like to know that I am doing my job well and get feedback”.

The service had a relaxed and homely feel. Everyone we spoke with spoke highly of the caring and respectful attitude of a consistent staff team which we observed throughout the inspection. One person told us, “I like to live here. I like the staff, they are all funny”. Another person said, “I like it here. I like my room and the staff they take a joke”.

People’s individual needs were assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support they required. People continued to be consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.

People and staff told us the management team continued to be approachable and professional. One person told us, “[Registered manager] is alright, I like her”. Another person said, “It’s good. It’s good here”.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

During our observation we saw that staff interacted well with people when they were supporting them and were knowledgeable about people's needs and preferences. We found staff were respectful and maintained people's dignity, privacy and independence. People explained that staff had helped people to consider each other's need for quiet time and had helped them agree how to do this. We saw that activities were altered to suit individual needs.

We were shown examples of person centred care records which were well organised into separate sections. This provided clarity for staff. These had been developed for each individual and documented their wishes and preferences in relation to how their care was provided and were presented in a form that assisted people to understand what they said. A relative's assistance was sought with this where the person was unable to fully contribute themselves.

Equality and diversity had been considered in the service by looking at each individual's needs. Any equipment or adaptations needed were provided.

During our observation we saw that staff interacted well with people when they were supporting them. We saw that staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and preferences. We found staff were respectful and maintained people's dignity, privacy and independence. For example staff knocked on people's door before entering and they checked on how people wanted to be supported before doing so. We saw that activities were altered to suit individual needs.

We were shown examples of person centred care records which were well organised into separate sections. This provided clarity for staff. These had been developed for each individual and documented their wishes and preferences in relation to how their care was provided. They were presented in a form that assisted people to understand what they said. A relative's assistance was sought with this where the person was unable to fully contribute themselves.

Equality and diversity had been considered in the service by looking at each individual's needs. Any equipment or adaptations needed were provided.