Archived: Showley Brook Residential Home for the Elderly

Updated 19 March 2016

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on the 28 January and 3 February 2016 and the first day was unannounced.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We contacted the local authority contracting unit for feedback and checked the information we held about the service and the provider. This included statutory notifications sent to us by the registered manager about incidents and events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during our inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with seven people who used the service, the registered manager, the cook, and four care staff. We observed lunch.

We looked at the care records of three people who used the service and other associated documents, including policies and procedures, safety and quality audits, quality assurance surveys, three staff recruitment records, induction and supervision records, minutes from meetings, complaints, comments and compliments records, and medication records.

Updated 19 March 2016

We carried out an inspection of Showley Brook Residential Home for the Elderly on 28 January and 3 February 2016. The first day was unannounced. We last inspected the home on 29 April 2014 and found the service was meeting the regulations that were applicable at that time.

Showley Brook Residential Home for the Elderly is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 15 people. Accommodation is provided in single bedrooms on two floors. The home is situated in a quiet residential area of Wilpshire Blackburn. At the time of inspection there were 13 people accommodated in the home.

The service was managed by 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 living in the home told us they felt safe and well cared for. They considered there was enough staff to support them when they needed any help. Good recruitment procedures were followed to ensure new staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. People using the service told us there were enough staff deployed to support and help them when they needed help.

The staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the individual needs of the people and knew how to recognise signs of abuse. Arrangements were in place to make sure staff were trained and supervised at all times.

Medicines were managed safely and people had their medicines when they needed them. Staff administering medicines had been trained to do this safely.

Risks to people’s health and safety had been identified, assessed and managed safely. The registered manager followed up to date guidance on safety issues such as falls prevention and pressure ulcer prevention.

We found the premises to be clean and hygienic and appropriately maintained. Regular health and safety checks were carried out and equipment used was appropriately maintained. The service held a maximum five star rating award for food hygiene from Environmental Health.

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that people’s rights were protected where they were unable to make decisions for themselves. Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people and the principles of best interest decisions. Routine choices such as preferred daily routines and level of support from staff for personal care was acknowledged and respected.

People told us they had their privacy respected by all staff. Each person had an individual care plan that was sufficiently detailed to ensure people were at the centre of their care. Care files contained a profile of people’s needs that set out what was important to each person, for example how they were dressed, personal care and how they could best be supported.

People’s care and support was kept under review, and people were given additional support when they required this. Referrals had been made to the relevant health and social care professionals for advice and support when people’s needs had changed. This meant people received prompt, co-ordinated and effective care.

We found staff were respectful to people, attentive to their needs and treated people with kindness and respect in their day to day care. Staff had been trained in End of Life care. This meant staff could approach people’s end of life care with confidence and ensure their dignity, comfort and respect was considered.

Activities were varied and people were given opportunities to take part in routine household tasks such as baking, washing up and folding laundry to enhance a sense of well being and worth. Visiting arrangements were good.

People were provided with a nutritionally balanced diet. All of the people we spoke with said that the food served in the home was very good.

People told us they were confident to raise any issue of concern with the provider and staff and that it would be taken seriously. They were regularly encouraged to express their views and opinions and also had opportunities to give feedback about the service, the staff and their environment in quality assurance surveys and at their meetings.

All people, their relatives and staff spoken with said the management of the service was very good and they had confidence in the registered manager. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and evidence to show improvements were made as a result of this.