We carried out a review of the data available to us about Badgers House Care Home 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 Badgers House Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
Badgers House Care Home is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care to up to 6 people. Six people were living at the service at the time of our inspection. Badgers House Care Home supports people with learning disabilities and autistic people. People live in individual flats across two houses on the same site.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support
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.
Staff knew people well and communicated with them effectively to ensure they were involved in discussions which affected them as far as possible.
Staff focused on people’s strengths and promoted what they could do, so people had a fulfilling and meaningful everyday life.
The service gave people care and support in a safe and clean environment which met their needs.
People had a choice about their living environment and were able to arrange and decorate their flats in the way they preferred.
Staff supported people to access specialist health and social care support in the community. Staff supported people with their medicines in a way that promoted their independence and achieved the best possible health outcome.
Right Care
Staff promoted equality and diversity in their support of people. They understood people’s cultural needs and provided culturally appropriate care.
People received kind and compassionate care. Staff communicated clearly and understood and responded to people’s individual needs consistently. People who had individual ways of communicating could be understood and interact comfortably with staff.
Staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. The service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it.
The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.
Staff worked with people, relatives and other professionals to assess risks people might face. Where appropriate, staff encouraged and enabled people to take positive risks.
Right Culture
People were supported by staff who understood the needs of individuals. This meant people received compassionate support which was tailored to their needs.
Staff were able to meet people’s needs and wishes and provide good quality support. They knew and understood people well and respected people’s choices.
Staff regularly reviewed and evaluated the support provided. Relatives and advocates provided support and people were involved in planning their care where possible.
There was a culture of continuing development and improvement. There were effective systems and checks, and staff received training to ensure they remained up to date and improved people’s quality of life with the support they provided.
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 22 September 2017).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service and the time since our last inspection. We only reviewed the safe and well led key questions at this inspection. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
The overall rating for the service has remained good based on the findings of this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Badgers House Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
This inspection took place on 30 August 2017. The inspection was unannounced, this meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.
At the last inspection in December 2014 the service was rated ‘Good’.
At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.
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.
We found the service provided was designed and delivered around the individual needs of the six people. They received care and support from skilled staff that were well managed.
Staff understood their role and responsibilities to keep people safe from harm. Individual risks were assessed and plans put in place to keep people safe. There was enough staff to safely provide care and support to people. Checks were carried out on staff before they started work with people to assess their suitability. Medicines were well managed and people received their medicines as prescribed.
Staff received regular supervision and the training needed to meet people’s needs. The service complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Arrangements were made for people to see a GP and other healthcare professionals when they needed to do so. People had access to the food and drink they chose when they wanted it. The physical environment was personalised and met people’s needs.
People received a service that was caring. They were cared for and supported by staff that understood their needs and knew them well. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and were sensitive to their needs regarding equality, diversity and their human rights. The care and support people received was highly individualised. They were offered a range of activities both at the service and in the local community. Staff actively sought to gain people’s views.
There was a clear and effective management structure in place. The registered manager and team leaders were well liked and respected by people and staff. The vision, values and culture of the service were understood by all staff. They provided good leadership and management and were in turn well supported by the provider. The safety and quality of service people received was monitored on a regular basis and where shortfalls were identified they were acted upon.
The service was made up of two buildings located next to each other within its own grounds. Three people lived in the bungalow and three people lived in the main house. The houses were staffed separately.
People were kept safe from abuse because staff understood what abuse was and the action they should take to ensure actual or potential abuse was reported. Staff had been appropriately recruited to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. Staff said there were sufficient numbers of staff on duty at all times.
The service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff had received appropriate training, and had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
All medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely. The service had policies and procedures for dealing with medicines and these were adhered to.
People had access to a range of healthcare professionals when they required specialist help. Care records showed advice had been sought from a range of health and social care professionals.
The registered manager assessed and monitored the quality of the service provided for people. Systems were in place to check on the standards within the service. These included regular audits of; care records, medicine management, health and safety, infection control and staff training and supervision.
Activities were personalised for each person. People made suggestions about activities they wanted to participate in each day. People were offered the choice if they wanted to go out with staff daily. An additional member of staff was on duty to enable people to access community facilities.
We spent time in communal areas of the home so that we could observe the direct care, attention and support that they received. We observed here was constant interaction between staff and people in the home. People were relaxed, happy and comfortable in each other's company.
The care records showed us that people's health needs had been assessed before they came to live in the home. These records included information from health and social care professionals which helped ensure people got the care and treatment they needed.
The home provided nutritional meals and the menu included meals selected by people who lived in the home. The service and the building were monitored and risk assessed to ensure they were suitable for the people who used them.
Badgers house care home is split into two separate units called 'the house' and 'the bungalow'. Three people live in each area, which is staffed as two separate units.
We observed some people being supported and examined their care plan documentation. This was to ascertain if an appropriate level of care was being provided, in line with their assessed needs. People using the service appeared relaxed around the staff that were supporting them.
We saw that people were supported to live as independently as possible within their own individual flats. People living in Badgers house care home had a range of complex support needs. The care was delivered to meet their individual need. We observed people were supported to access the local community and were also supported with all aspects of their health and well being.
The staff demonstrated that they had an understanding and awareness of the complex needs of people who lived at Badgers Close. Staff we spoke with told us they felt they provided a high quality service to people living in Badgers house care home.
We saw that people were supported to live a fulfilling life in the home and in the community. People were supported with their range of complex needs. People were being supported to maintain their health, safety and wellbeing.
We saw care plans and risk assessments records that explained how to care for people and how to protect their safety and wellbeing in Badgers Close as well as in the community. We saw that care plans and risk assessments were not all being consistently regularly reviewed and updated. Care Plans and risk assessments need to be reviewed and checked regularly, to make sure they are up to date and reflect any changes in people's needs.
The staff demonstrated that they had an understanding and awareness of the complex needs of people who lived at Badgers Close.
People were helped to stay safe at Badgers Close and were protected from abuse. The staff had been on training courses to help them to understand how to safeguard them from abuse. Staff knew who to report an allegation of abuse to. They were aware of the role of the local authority in the safeguarding processes that would be followed in the event of an allegation of abuse being made at Badgers Close.
The number of staff on duty mostly met the needs of people who used the service. However the numbers of staff on duty in the bungalow at weekends did not always meet people's needs. This was evidenced by what had been written in the care plans of the three people who lived in the bungalow. We saw written evidence that they needed 2 staff to help them in a number of areas of their daily life's including supporting people to stay safe. With only two staff on duty this meant there was not enough staff to always meet those people needs.
We saw methods were in use to check monitor and improve the quality of the service people received. We saw there were systems to review and learn from critical incidents and occurrences that may have impacted on people's health and wellbeing.