You are here

Unique Senior Care - Briar Croft Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 18 April 2018

The inspection took place on 26 March 2018 and was announced. The provider was given short notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available to spend time with us.

This was the first inspection of the service since its registration with us in November 2016. The service had initially registered under the brand name Home Instead Senior Care. In November 2017 the service had been renamed as Unique Senior Care.

Unique Senior Care at Briar Croft is registered to provide personal care to people living in

specialist 'extra care' housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented or purchased on a shared ownership scheme, and is the occupant's own home. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection only looked at people's personal care service.

Unique Senior Care also provide an on-call emergency service to everyone living in the building under a separate ‘well-being’ arrangement with the landlord, which people pay for as part of the service charge for the shared premises.

Briar Croft has 64 one or two bedroom apartments. People living at Briar Croft share on-site facilities such as a lift, lounge, restaurant, laundry, garden and hairdressing salon. People who need support with personal care are free to choose Unique Senior Care or any other domiciliary care service as their provider. At the time of this inspection, Unique Senior Care supported 20 people, 19 of whom received support with personal care.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People were protected from the risks of abuse because staff received training in safeguarding people and understood their responsibility to report any concerns. The provider checked staff were suitable for their role before they started working for the service.

People’s care plans explained the risks to their individual health and wellbeing and the actions staff should take to support them safely. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated when people’s needs changed. Staff were trained in safe medicines administration and in how to minimise the risks of infection.

The provider made sure there were enough staff, with the right skills and experience to support people effectively, and in line with their agreed care plan. Staff had regular opportunities to discuss their practice and consider their personal development.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet that met their preferences. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies, procedures and staff training supported this least restrictive practice.

People felt they were supported by staff who genuinely cared for them as individuals. Staff understood people’s diverse needs and interests and encouraged them to maintain their independence according to their wishes and abilities.

Staff were happy working for the service and felt supported to build relationships with individual people based on trust and shared interests. Staff supported people and encouraged them to maintain their interests and links with their community, according to their preferences. Staff respected people’s privacy and promoted their dignity.

People were confident any complaints and concerns they raised would be dealt with promptly. People were encouraged to share their opinions about the quality of the service at regular indivi

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 18 April 2018

The service was safe.

People felt safe, because they trusted the staff who supported and cared for them. Staff understood their responsibilities to report any concerns about people's safety or if they believed people were at risk of abuse. Risks to people�s individual health and wellbeing were identified and care plans explained how staff should minimise the risks. The provider�s recruitment process ensured staff were suitable to work at the service. There were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff to support people safely. Medicines were managed and administered safely and staff had training in preventing the risks of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 18 April 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were skilled and trained to meet people's needs effectively. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and supported people to make their own decisions. People were supported to maintain their health and staff supported them to obtain advice from healthcare professionals, when their health needs changed. People were supported to maintain a nutritionally balanced diet that met their individual needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 18 April 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by caring staff, who took the time to get to know them well. Staff understood people�s likes, dislikes and preferences for how they were cared for and supported. Staff respected people�s privacy and promoted their dignity and independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 18 April 2018

The service was responsive.

Staff were responsive to people�s needs and preferences and adapted to any changes people requested. People�s care was planned for their preferred times and was delivered by a consistent staff team. People and relatives were confident that any concerns or complaints were responded to and dealt with promptly. The service worked with people�s families and healthcare professionals to ensure people�s wishes were respected at the end of their life.

Well-led

Good

Updated 18 April 2018

The service was well-led.

The provider sought people�s views about the service and used their feedback to improve the quality of the service. Staff felt well-led because they had regular opportunities to discuss their practice and develop their skills and knowledge. The provider analysed accidents and incidents, to make sure actions were taken to minimise the risks of a re-occurrence. The registered manager understood their obligations to notify us of important events at the service. The provider sought external professional advice to ensure their quality assurance systems were sufficiently robust to identify any omissions or opportunities for improvements.