Archived: The Paddock

Updated 12 March 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Inspection team:

The inspection was completed by one adult social care inspector

Service and service type: The service is registered care home providing personal care without nursing for up to four people with brain injuries. It is run by the Brain Injury Rehabilitation Society and so had access to therapists based at another site.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often supporting other sites. Also, people living at these services are younger adults and we intended to visit at the weekend, we needed to be sure some of them would be in to speak with. What we did:

Before the inspection we used information, the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. (PIR) Providers are required to send us key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We looked at information we held about the service including notifications they had made to us about important events. We also reviewed all other information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority and members of the public.

During the inspection we;

• Spoke with three people living at the service.

• Spoke with two staff and the registered manager.

• Reviewed two care plans and daily records, including records relating to medicines.

• Reviewed records of accidents, incidents, complaints and compliments.

• Checked training and personnel records.

• Reviewed audits and quality assurance reports.

Updated 12 March 2019

About the service: The Paddock is a small residential care home that was providing personal and nursing care to three people at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People enjoyed living at The Paddock, they felt safe and well cared for. Two people were being supported to move onto more independent living. Staff were supporting them with these plans.

Care and support was well planned and promoted people’s independence, choice and diversity. Staff understood what was important for each person and how best to deliver safe and effective care. Staff had good training to ensure their competencies and help them understand the complexities of working with people with acquired brain injuries.

Detailed risk assessments were in place to support people to take positive risks and remain safe.

Staff understood how to safeguard people from abuse. The staff team empowered people to make choices about what they wanted to do.

People were supported to maintain good health through ensuring regular check-ups, healthy eating and exercise. There was access to a multidisciplinary team to ensure people’s holistic needs were considered and met. This included physiotherapist and psychologist support.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs and staff had the right skills and support to deliver high quality care and support.

There was effective leadership and good team working. People’s views were sought and actions taken to improve where possible. The ethos and values of the service were embedded into everyday practice. People were treated with kindness and respect. Their privacy and dignity was upheld and their diverse needs were fully considered.

Good governance ensured records and the environment were well maintained. There was learning from any accident and incidents.

Rating at last inspection: GOOD (August 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.