You are here

Bristol South Rehabilitation Centre Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 January 2018

This inspection took place on 12 December 2017 and was unannounced. The service was registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to a maximum of 20 people over the age of 18 (only 18 beds were in use). At the time of our inspection there were 10 people in residence. This is a rehabilitation service, jointly funded by Bristol City Council (registered provider) and Bristol Community Health. Rehabilitation services are provided for up to six weeks in order to support people who are medically fit to be discharged from hospital but need further therapy. The service may also be used to prevent a hospital admission.

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.

After the last inspection in June 2016 we rated the service overall as Requires Improvement. We had identified two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The provider had then sent us their action plan which detailed the improvements they would make.

As part of this inspection we have checked to see that these improvements were made and sustained. We have now rated the service as Good and there were no breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

People were safe. Staff knew what to do if there were concerns about a person’s welfare and had received safeguarding adults training. Risk assessments were completed as part of the care planning process. Where risks were identified there were plans in place to reduce or eliminate the risk. Each person had a written personal emergency evacuation plan detailing the level of support they would need in the case of an emergency. The risks of employing unsafe staff were reduced because of robust staff recruitment procedures.

The premises were well maintained. Regular maintenance checks were completed to ensure the building and facilities were safe. Checks were also made of the fire safety systems, the hot and cold water temperatures and equipment to make sure they were safe for staff and people to use. The premises were clean tidy and fresh smelling.

Staffing levels were calculated and based on the collective needs of each person who was using the service at that time. This ensured the staff were able to meet all care and support needs safely. Medicines were managed safely.

The service was effective. New staff completed an induction training programme at the start of their employment and any new-to-care staff completed the Care Certificate. There was a mandatory training programme for all other staff to complete to ensure they had the necessary skills and knowledge to care for people correctly.

The mental capacity of each person to make informed decisions was assessed on admission to the centre and then reviewed. People were involved in making decisions and encouraged to make their own choices about their care and support. The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were provided with sufficient quantities of food and drink. They were supported to regain life skills in order to enable them to return home and be able to look after themselves. There were arrangements in place to ensure people were temporarily registered with a local GP during their stay. The service worked in partnership with other healthcare professionals who supported the people using the service.

The service was caring. Staff had good working relationships with the people they were looking after and were committed to their role of rehabilitation. The person was the focus of all decisions made about their care

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 January 2018

The service remains safe,

Effective

Good

Updated 24 January 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were trained and well supported enabling them to carry out their role.

The service was aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and worked in accordance with this. People were asked to consent before staff helped them with tasks.

People were provided with sufficient food and drink and were able to make choices about what they ate and drank. They were assisted by healthcare professionals and involved in the planning for when they moved from the service.

The premises were appropriate for the purposes of the service provision.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 January 2018

The service remains caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 January 2018

The service remains responsive.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 January 2018

The service was well led.

There was good leadership and management in place. People�s views and experiences were seen as paramount to the success of the service. Staff were well supported.

There was a programme of checks and audits in place to ensure that the quality of the service was measured. The registered manager planned to improve administrative systems to make access to records easier.