• Care Home
  • Care home

Cuerden Developments Limited - Berkeley House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Berkeley House, Ellesmere Road, Wigan, Lancashire, WN5 9LA (01942) 737372

Provided and run by:
Cuerden Developments Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 1 January 2019

The inspection.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.

Inspection team: The first day consisted of an inspector and assistant inspector. The second day was completed by an inspector.

Service and service type: Berkeley House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

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: This inspection was unannounced.

What we did: We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about and we sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with two people who used the service and five relatives to ask about their experience of the care provided. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with the compliance manager, registered manager, team leader, occupational therapist, two staff nurses and three care staff. We looked at records in relation to people living at the home which included, three MAR and two care files. We also looked at four staff files, as well as records relating to the oversight and governance of the home, policies and procedures, recruitment, training and quality monitoring.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 1 January 2019

About the service:

• Berkeley House is purpose built nursing home for people with an acquired brain injury, learning disability or mental health need. The home has 18 en-suite bedrooms across three floors with lift access to all floors. The service offers short respite and long-term care for people aged between 18 and 65 years. There were 17 people living at the home at the time of inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

• People living at the home received outstanding care which was responsive to their needs. People's confidence and independence had increased since living at Berkeley House. People were encouraged to live full and active lives and were empowered to participate in value based activities and pursue educational and employment opportunities. The service ethos was to fulfil people’s aspirations and support them to achieve their goals. Activities were meaningful and reflected people’s interests and personal preferences.

• We received excellent feedback from people, their relatives and healthcare professionals regarding the quality of care provided to people living at the home. A relative said; “It’s unbelievable what goes on here. It’s made such a difference to our lives, we can’t sum it up in to words our feelings for this home and what they have achieved for our [persons’ name].”

• People had comprehensive risk assessments in place and support plans that were focused on empowering people to achieve their goals and aspirations. People's support plans were tailored to them and had been developed with involvement of their families. People received multidisciplinary input from a range of professionals which included, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychiatry and psychology. Staff benefitted from specialist training and people were working with psychology to complete formulation work which focussed on their life journey.

• Staff consistently demonstrated the values of the service and put people at the heart of everything they did. Staff were clear they worked as a team and for the benefit of people living at Berkeley House. Staff provided enthusiastic and individualised support to people over daily tasks such as meeting their personal care needs and tidying. People and their relatives spoke highly of the support people received and attributed their progress, enhanced sense of wellbeing and quality of life to the staff and support they provided. People were motivated to achieve and their accomplishments were celebrated.

• The service had a strong leadership presence with a compliance manager and registered manager who had a clear vision about the direction of the service. There were strong, person centred clinical leadership and governance arrangements with people and staff being encouraged to influence service change. Quality improvement plans had been developed and aligned with the key lines of enquiry (KLOE’s). Each team was assigned a KLOE and the lead was responsible for ensuring comments and feedback was incorporated into the action plan to ensure continuous improvement of the service. People and staff spoke favourably of the quality assurance plans and felt empowered to make a difference to the home that was meaningful to them. People and staff were motivated to continue to raise standards and achieve outstanding care and facilities for everybody living at the home.

Rating at last inspection: GOOD. (The last report was published 14 April 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remains Good but responsive had improved to outstanding.

Follow up: Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our reinspection schedule for those services rated Good.