You are here

Archived: Brompton House Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 9 March 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection was unannounced and took place on 9 and 11 March 2016.

The home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care, and the treatment of disease, disorder or injury for a maximum of 40 people. There were 37 people living at the home on the day of the inspection. There was a registered manager in place. 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 told us they felt safe and well cared for and staff were able to demonstrate they had sufficient knowledge and skills to carry out their roles effectively to ensure people who used the service were safe.

People were cared for by staff that demonstrated knowledge of the different types of potential abuse to people and how to respond to actual or suspected abuse.

People told us their needs were met and staff said that recently increased staff numbers enabled them to meet people’s needs and perform their roles effectively.

The assessments of people’s capacity to consent had been completed. People’s rights and freedoms were respected by staff. Staff understood people’s individual care needs and had received training so they would be able to care for people in the best way for them. There were good links with health and social care professionals and staff sought and acted upon advice received so that people’s needs were met.

People using the service were positive in their feedback about the service. People told us they enjoyed meals times and were positive was about the choice of food they received. People said their privacy and dignity was maintained and we made observations that supported this.

People received care that met their individual needs. People were encouraged to express their views and give feedback about their time at the service. People said staff listened to them and they felt confident they could raise any issues should the need arise.

Staff spoke highly of the management team and felt supported. Staff spoke highly of the teamwork within the service. The quality of service provision and care was continually monitored and actions taken where required.

Inspection carried out on 1 November 2013

During a routine inspection

Brompton House provided nursing care for older people. During this inspection we spoke with nine people who lived at the home, two relatives, five staff and the registered manager.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support that they received. People told us, “It’s grand. They (staff) do a wonderful job”.

Staff understood people's needs and responded to them in the way the person wished.

We found that proper steps had been taken to ensure that individualised care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

People were provided with a choice of nutritious meals that they enjoyed.

We found that staff were supported to meet the specific needs of the group of people they were caring for.

We found that any comments and complaints people made had been responded to appropriately and ensured that people were listened to.

Inspection carried out on 4 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with the registered manager, seven people who used the service, four staff and a health care professional.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support that they received. One person said the care was: "Very good". We found that proper steps had been taken to ensure that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Robust arrangements were in place to ensure people were safeguarded from the risk of harm.

Staff had been recruited in an appropriate way and checks had been undertaken to ensure that they were suitable to care for vulnerable people.

People were asked for their views about their care so they felt involved in their care and treatment. A system of audit was in place to ensure that people were not placed at risk of receiving inappropriate care.

Inspection carried out on 6 December 2011

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

We carried out this review to check on the care and welfare of people using this service.

The atmosphere in the home was very calm and relaxed and staff were observed looking after people in a caring and professional manner.

People were very positive about the care and treatment they received at the home. One person told us they were ‘comfortably looked after’. One person we spoke to told us that their family had viewed the home in the first instance to see if it was suitable for them and that they had been pleased with their choice

When we walked around the home we found it was a homely environment and generally in good condition although some areas were showing signs of wear and tear. Some of the corridor carpets and a carpet in a lounge area were heavily stained and external wooden window frames in some rooms were showing signs of deterioration.

There were two areas of garden accessible to people who used the service. One of the areas was a sensory garden which was also home to some hens and a bird aviary.

We saw that people were able to bring personal items into the home and some people had chosen to bring in personal items of furniture and have private telephone lines. Rooms had been personalised to reflect the specific preferences of people living in them.

People told us that they were able to make decisions about where to spend their time, with some people choosing to spend time in communal areas and others preferring the privacy of their own room. One person said they could have their breakfast at a time to suit them and that they could stay in bed if they chose to.

The home had an activities coordinator on site for 30 hours each week spread over four days and there was a vacancy for five more hours. When we spoke with people who used the service they told us that they were able to decide which activities they wished to participate in. One person said ‘activities are here if I want it. It is always up to me’.

One person commented on the fact that activities were only provided for four days each week and told us that they felt this was not enough as some people had dementia and needed more stimulation.

When we looked at care records they showed that people’s needs had been assessed before their admission to the home. They were reassessed on admission and any risks had been identified. The records showed that staff were regularly monitoring each person’s condition and any concerns were reported correctly and specialist medical support accessed as necessary. We saw evidence that family members or resident representatives were kept informed of changes in peoples well being.

People we spoke to said that staff responded appropriately to any changes in their well being and contacted the doctor for them when they felt it was needed.

When we spoke with people who used the service they said that staff responded to any calls for assistance in a timely manner most of the time. One person referred to the fact that staff were very busy particularly in the mornings. They also commented that there were often times when people who used the service may be sat in the lounge areas without any supervision or engagement from staff.

When we spoke to staff they showed a good understanding of the needs of people in their care and their individual preferences. We saw staff interacting with people in a caring and sensitive manner. One person described the staff in every department as ‘kind, caring people who have the right attitude to care’.

We observed the lunchtime routine in the dining room and we saw that the atmosphere was very relaxed and staff were supporting people to eat their meals in a sensitive manner. People who used the service told us that the food was good, they were given plenty to eat and that they could have alternatives from the main menu if they wished.

People who used the service told us that they felt confident that any concerns they raised would be listened to by the registered manager and resolved. The registered manager told us that they were very visible around the home each day. They said that this enabled people to talk to them about their experiences and any concerns they may have and therefore issues can be dealt with straight way before they escalated into a bigger problem.

We saw that people were encouraged to provide feedback at resident and relative meetings which were held on a quarterly basis.

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