Archived: Starbrook

Updated 14 February 2017

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 30 November and 5 December 2016 and was unannounced.’

Before the inspection, we reviewed information we hold about the service, including previous inspection reports and notifications sent to us by the provider. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to send to us.

During the visit we observed four people and the interaction assigned staff providing one to one support had with the person they were supporting. We spoke with the regional manager, the registered manager and the registered manager from another location. We also spoke to three staff including service support team (SST) staff members. We received email feedback from three relatives and from healthcare professionals involved with people at the service. We also looked at records about the management of the service.

Updated 14 February 2017

This inspection took place on the 30 November and 5 December 2016 and was unannounced. The service is registered to accommodate up to six people with a learning disability or autism spectrum disorder who require personal care.

A registered manager was 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.’

There were minor inconsistencies with documenting checks that had been undertaken and some rewording was needed to clarify the actions staff must take to maintain a consistent approach when supporting people.

Relatives told us the staff were good and their family members received the care and treatment needed in their preferred manner. However, the constant theme with their responses was that there had been staff changes. These relatives told us senior manager had reassured them that steps were being taken to provide consistent care to people from regular staff.

The people we observed were relaxed and comfortable with the staff supporting them. We did not observe signs of distress from people when staff were offering support or attention. The staff we spoke with were able to explain the safeguarding of vulnerable adults from abuse procedure. These staff knew the types of abuse and the expectations for them to report alleged abuse.

Risks to keep people safe from potential harm were assessed. Where risks were identified action plans were developed to minimise the risks. For example, where people were at risk of choking, food was served in bite size pieces. Members of staff were knowledgeable about supporting people to undertake risks safely. For example, assessing venues for people experiencing activities for the first time.

Accidents and incidents were reported. We saw some reports had been analysed for trends and patterns and action had been taken to ensure staff were following guidance and to assess if care plans had to be reviewed.. A member of staff said the analysis had provided them with feedback about inconsistencies with staff following strategies.

Staff said there had been staff vacancies but this had improved. They said there were opportunities to discuss personal development with their line manager. Their performance was monitored and the training provided helped them deliver care and treatment.

People were able to make some daily living decisions and followed set routines which they preferred. Where people refused to undertake their routines staff discussed the suitability of the routines. We saw staff communicated well with people. We saw staff reinforce to people using their preferred method of communication “what was happening now” and “later”.

Care plans were in place on how staff were to meet people’s needs. The regional manager told us new care plan templates were to be introduced which were to reduce duplication of information. Positive Behaviour Management (PBM) strategies were in place which gave staff guidance on managing behaviours that challenge. . Service Support Team (SST) staff said their role was to support staff with developing PBM strategies which helped people maintain their usual behaviour.

People participated in household tasks and in activities both in house and in the local community. Social stories were developed by staff to help people understand events and prepare them for appointments such as healthcare.

Menus were prepared and the stocks of fresh, frozen and tinned foods showed people were supported to eat a well-balanced diet.

The provider regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care provided at Starbrook. The service encouraged feedback their relatives, which they used to make improvements.