You are here

Brighton & Hove City Council - Craven Vale Resource Centre Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 21 February 2017

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on the 21 February 2017 and was unannounced.

Craven Vale Resource Centre provides personal care and support for up to 31 people. Care and support is provided to adults, but predominantly to older people. It provides people with a short-term period of rehabilitation. People are supported following discharge from hospital, or to prevent admission to hospital to regain their independence and ability to return home. Short-term rehabilitation is a joint partnership between Brighton and Hove City Council and the Sussex Community NHS Trust to provide co-ordinated care. People receive care and support from social workers, social care staff, medical and nursing staff, physiotherapy and occupational therapy staff. People can also be provided with a period of respite care. The service has a high level of admissions and discharges due to the short-term nature of the service, and there are no long term placements. On the day of the inspection 28 people were resident in the service.

At the last inspection on 22 July 2014, the service was rated Good overall. At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall. Where the provision of social activities had been highlighted as an area in need of improvement this had been addressed. However, we did find an area of practice in need of improvement in relation to the recording of people’s fluid intake, which had not been consistently maintained.

People and their relatives told us they felt people were safe in the service. They knew who they could talk with if they had any concerns. They felt it was somewhere where they could raise concerns and they would be listened to. Systems in place to assess and manage risks had been maintained to provide safe and effective care. People were supported by staff who had been through robust recruitment procedures.

Sufficient numbers of suitable staff had been maintained to keep people safe and meet their care and support needs. Staff told us they received supervision, were supported to develop their skills and knowledge by receiving training which helped them to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively. One member of staff told us, “Supervision is very supportive and we meet on a daily basis to discuss workload.” Training records were kept up-to-date, plans were in place to promote good practice and develop the knowledge and skills of staff.

People's individual care and support needs were assessed before they moved into the service. Care and support provided was personalised and based on the identified needs of each individual. People’s care and support plans and risk assessments had been maintained and reviewed regularly. One member of staff told us, “I really love it here we work with the therapists and doctors and really communicate with people. It can make a difference and build confidence. It’s a good staff team and everyone is approachable.” People told us they had felt involved and listened to. Where people were unable to make decisions for themselves this had been considered under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and appropriate actions continued to be followed to arrange meetings to make a decision within their best interests.

The service continued to have a relaxed and homely feel. A relative told us, “I’m very used to the place and everyone is like friends. It’s very relaxed and everyone is happy and jolly.” People were supported by kind and caring staff who treated them with respect and dignity. They were spoken with and supported in a sensitive, respectful and professional manner.

People told us the food was good and plentiful. Staff told us that an individual’s dietary requirements formed part of their pre-admission assessment and people were regularly consulted about their food preferences. Healthcare professionals, including speech and language therapists and dieticians, had been consulted with as required.

Staff told us that communication throughout the service continued to be

Inspection carried out on 22 July 2014

During a routine inspection

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 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

This was an unannounced inspection. Craven Vale Resource Centre provides personal care and support for up to 31 people. Care and support is provided to adults, but predominantly to people over 65 years of age. It provides short-term rehabilitation for a period of usually one to two weeks, but can be up to six weeks. People are supported following discharge from hospital, or to prevent admission to hospital to regain their independence and ability to return home. Short-term rehabilitation is a joint partnership between Brighton and Hove City Council and the Sussex Community NHS Trust to provide co-ordinated care. People receive care and support from social workers, social care staff, medical and nursing staff, physiotherapy and occupational therapy staff. People can also be provided with a period of respite care. The service has a high level of admissions and discharges due to the short-term nature of the service, and there are no long term placements. There were 26 people living in the service on the day of our inspection.

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.

People's individual care and support needs were assessed before they moved into the service and care and support plans and risk assessments were maintained and reviewed regularly. People confirmed that they had been involved, or had the opportunity to be involved, in assessments, care planning and reviews. They were aware of the rehabilitation element of the care and support provided, and that it was to help them to be more independent on their return home. They told us they had felt involved and listened to.

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. They were spoken with and supported in a sensitive, respectful and professional manner. Care staff always knocked on the door before entering bedrooms.

People told us they felt safe. They knew who they could talk with if they had any concerns. They felt it was somewhere where they could raise concerns and be listened to. There were systems in place to assess and manage risks and to provide safe and effective care.

People said the food was good and plentiful. Staff told us that an individual’s dietary requirements formed part of their pre-admission assessment and people were regularly consulted about their food preferences. Healthcare professionals, including speech and language therapists and dieticians, had been consulted as required.

Some social activities were provided, however, the feedback was varied with some people not being aware of the activities available or people told us they would welcome more social activities to join in. People told us they had guidance and regular support from the physiotherapists, and occupational therapists. These specialists had worked with them to improve their mobility before returning home.

People had access to health care professionals as required. Pressure relieving mattresses were in place where assessments had highlighted a risk of pressure damage to the person’s skin. All appointments with, or visits by, health care professionals were recorded in individual care plans. People told us their physical healthcare needs were effectively met.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. Staff told us they were supported to develop their skills and knowledge by receiving training which helped them to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively. Training records were kept up-to-date, plans were in place to promote good practice and develop the knowledge and skills of staff.

Staff told us that communication throughout the service was good and included comprehensive handovers at the beginning of each shift and regular staff meetings. They confirmed that they felt valued and supported by the managers, who they described as very approachable.

People were asked to complete a satisfaction questionnaire at the end of their stay. The registered manager told us that senior staff carried out a range of internal audits, including care planning, medication, health and safety and staff training, and records confirmed this. The registered manager also told us that they operated an 'open door policy' so people who used the service, staff and visitors to the home could discuss any issues they may have.

Inspection carried out on 4 March 2014

During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made

At our last inspection on 18 September 2013, we found that the provider was not meeting all the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. At this inspection, we found that the improvements required to comply with the regulations in relation to records had been made.

We spoke with six members of staff; these were the registered manager, two senior care workers, a care worker and two registered nurses. We looked at a sample of people's care and support plans,records of the checks of the pressure relieving mattresses and of the emergency equipment.

We found that new care planning documentation had been implemented in the service, which was now being completed. Staff told us of systems in place to check the information and quality of the care and support documentation in place. There was a record of the checks made on the equipment.

Inspection carried out on 18 September 2013

During a routine inspection

There was a new manager for the service. The name of the previous manager will remain on the report until an application has been made and processed to remove their name.

21 people were resident in the service at the time of our visit. We observed the care provided, looked at supporting care documentation, food records, staff records and records relating to the management of the service. We spoke individually with the deputy manager, a registered nurse, a physiotherapist, two senior care workers, three care workers one of whom was one of the organisation’s bank staff, a cook, a domestic, eight people who used the service and a relative.

This told us that people were able to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People told us they felt they were well cared for by staff who understood their care needs. They said staff were very caring and responsive to their care needs. Comments received included "I can’t fault it,” and “I have been very happy here. I have loved it,” “It’s been brilliant and I have loved it. “

People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink.

Infection control policies and procedures were in place to protect people.

There were sufficient numbers of staff with the right skills and qualifications to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

The records for the management of the home were in place and kept securely and kept securely. However, the care documentation in place did not fully detail all the care to be provided.

Inspection carried out on 4 December 2012

During a routine inspection

There were 26 people who used the service at the time of our visit. We observed the care provided, looked at supporting care documentation, we spoke with the registered manager who is referred to as manager in the report, the deputy manager, a senior care officer on duty, two care workers, one care worker who facilitated activities in the home, two physiotherapists, an occupational therapist, a social worker, four people who used the service and three relatives.

This told us people or their representatives had been able to express their views about the care provided, and where possible people who used the service had been involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.

People’s care needs had been assessed and care and treatment had been planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

People’s care had been provided by care workers who understood their care needs and who had been provided with training and support. Comments received included, “I like it here, such nice people. I always get better here,” “It’s a miracle what they have done, she has physio regularly or the nurse or the staff take her for a little walk,” ”The staff are wonderful,” ”They are wonderful, I cant speak highly enough”, and ”Mum’s care has been fantastic here and would thoroughly recommend it.”

People knew who to talk with if they had any concerns about their care.

The provider had quality monitoring systems in place to regularly review the care provided.

Inspection carried out on 6 January 2011

During a routine inspection

All people we spoke to said they liked living at Craven Vale Resource Centre, overall they were happy and well cared for and had no complaints about any aspect of the service they received. People said that they felt they were listened to and any requests were facilitated whenever possible and the staff were always kind, patient and attentive. They said the food was plentiful, varied and of a good quality with plenty of choices.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)