You are here

Bramblings Residential Home Requires improvement

We are carrying out a review of quality at Bramblings Residential Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 19 July 2019

About the service

Bramblings Residential Home is a residential care home accommodating up to 42 older people in one adapted building. There were 31 people living at the service at the time of our inspection. People had varying care needs, including, living with dementia, Parkinson’s disease, epilepsy and diabetes. Some people could walk around independently, and other people needed the assistance of staff or staff and equipment to help them to move around.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Although improvements had been made in most areas and this was continuing, some areas continued to need further work to ensure a good service was received.

Environmental risks were present as doors to areas that housed equipment or substances that could be harmful to people were left unlocked, posing a potential hazard to people’s safety. Individual risks to people’s health and safety had improved, however, some areas of risk had not been identified so measures were not in place to protect people.

The safe management of people’s prescribed medicines had improved, people were given their medicines by staff who had received additional training to ensure their competence. There were still areas of concern that meant further safety measures needed to be applied around topical creams, patches and the safe disposal of medicines.

Some staff had not kept their essential training up to date and new staff had not completed training deemed mandatory by the provider in a timely manner to make sure they had the skills to provide the care people needed.

The premises needed updating and repairs were not always carried out quickly, creating potential health and safety risks. Areas of the service and the signs in place did not present a dementia friendly environment. The garden was not accessible for many people as it was overgrown at a time when the weather permitted opportunities for people to enjoy the outdoors.

People’s care records were not always accurately recorded to make sure their needs were fully met, although improvements had been made in this area. Improvements had been made to the monitoring and auditing processes to check the quality and safety of the service, however, this area needed to improve further. The quality processes needed to be embedded and sustained to provide assurance.

Access and opportunities to meaningful activities that met people’s social needs and preferences needed further improvement. We have made a recommendation about this.

Care plans to help staff support people with their wishes at the end of their life were still a work in progress and needed further improvement.

Improvements had been made to staffing levels. People told us they did not have to wait for staff to assist them and staff said they could spend more time with people, meaning their own well-being had improved. Safe recruitment practices continued to be used. Staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe and what their responsibilities were to raise concerns they had about people’s treatment.

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.

People were supported to access the advice of healthcare professionals and treatment plans were now followed. Only good feedback was given about the food and people were given assistance when they needed it.

A more person-centred care planning process had been introduced and this was reflected in the staff approach to care and support. People were supported with their individual communication needs and this was evident when observing in the communal areas. Supporting people to maintain their independence was clear from care planning documents and seeing the support provided.

How complaints and concerns were listened to and dealt with was more open and the opportunity was taken to learn less

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 19 July 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 19 July 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 July 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 19 July 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 19 July 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.