28 August 2018
During a routine inspection
Ashbrook Neuro Rehabilitation is a single storey detached building situated in a residential area of Rochdale. The unit is registered to provide care and support for up to seven adults with an acquired brain injury. The building has been adapted to provide seven private suites. Each have a bathroom, bedroom/ lounge, kitchenette and a private or shared garden area. The service also has a communal living area and therapy rooms.
Our last inspection of the service was in September 2015. At that inspection we rated the service good overall. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
The service had a new manager who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). He showed enthusiasm and commitment to developing the service. 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
There were systems in place to help safeguard people from abuse. Recruitment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
The unit was clean and well-maintained. People had appropriate equipment in place and this had been serviced and regularly checked to ensure it was safe to use and functioning correctly. There were effective infection control and prevention measures within the service. The administration and management of medicines was carried out safely.
People were supported through their rehabilitation by a team of staff made up of registered nurses, rehabilitation coaches (support workers), therapists (physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy), therapy assistants and a visiting neuropsychologist. There were sufficient staff to support people appropriately.
New staff were provided with an induction programme. Staff received training in a range of topics, including safeguarding, infection control, health and safety, fire safety, mental capacity and consent, first aid and moving and handling. We found some people’s refresher training was slightly out of date. The manager has arranged for this to be completed. The majority of staff had received supervision. However, we noted the registered nurses had not received supervision this year. We have been assured this will take place in the next few weeks and we have asked for evidence to show it has been completed.
The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. People were supported to make choices, such as what they would like to eat and wear and what they would like to do. Staff sought consent before assisting people. People/relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support provided at the service.
People chose what food they would like to eat, and where able, were encouraged and helped to cook their meals.
People’s care records were detailed and person-centred. They provided staff with sufficient information to guide them on how people should be helped in their rehabilitation. Staff supported and encouraged people to be as independent as possible within their capability.
The service had a process for handling complaints and concerns. There had not been any recent complaints.