• Care Home
  • Care home

Briar House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Losinga Road, Kings Lynn, Norfolk, PE30 2DQ (01553) 760500

Provided and run by:
Larchwood Care Homes (South) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 18 July 2018

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 5 June 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector, and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the PIR and other information we held about the service. This included notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We also asked representatives from the local authority commissioning team for their views on the service.

We spoke with ten people living at the service who were able to give us their views of the care and support they received. We also observed care throughout the inspection.

We spoke with six staff, the manager; the regional manager; three members of care staff and the daily activities co-ordinator. We spoke with five visitors/relatives visiting the service.

We looked at care documentation for three people living at Briar House, medicines records, three staff recruitment files, staff training records and other records relating to the management of the service.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 18 July 2018

Briar House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service accommodates up to 62 people in a two-storey building which is served by a main lift to the upper floor. Nursing care is not provided.

At our comprehensive inspection in September 2016 the service was rated as requires improvement. There were not enough staff to ensure that people’s needs were met in a timely way. Staff were not recording people whose nutritional intake was poor. Improvements were needed in the quality monitoring ensure that the service could develop and improve. This unannounced inspection took place on 5 June 2018. Improvements had been made and the service is now rated as good.

There was not a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the home. 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 home is run.

A new manager was in post and they had applied to the Commission for registration.

People were kept safe and staff were knowledgeable about reporting any incidents of harm.

People’s individual risk assessments in care records had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. Care records showed they were reviewed and any changes had been recorded.

The environment was clean and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required. Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when needed. This reduced the risk of cross infection. We found supplies were available for staff to use when required.

People were helped to take their medicines by staff who were trained and had been assessed to be competent to administer medicines.

People were looked after by enough staff, who were trained and supervised to support them with their individual needs. Pre-employment checks were completed on staff before they were assessed to be suitable to look after people who used the service.

Staff were able to demonstrate their understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS); these provide legal safeguards for people who may be unable to make their own decisions.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met. Care records seen confirmed visits to and from General Practitioners (GP's) and other healthcare professionals had been recorded.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts of food and drink.

Staff knew people they supported and provided a personalised service in a caring way. Care plans were organised and had identified care and support people required. We found by conversations with staff they had a good understanding of protecting and respecting people's human rights.

People participated in a range of activities within the service and received the support they needed to help them to do this.

Information available with regards to support from an external advocate should this be required by them.

People were involved in the running of the service. Regular meetings were held for the people and their relatives so that they could discuss any issues or make recommendations for improvements to how the service was run.

There was a process in place so that people’s concerns and complaints were listened to and were acted upon.

Quality monitoring procedures were in place and action was taken where improvements were identified. There were clear management arrangements in place. Staff, people and their relatives were able to make suggestions and actions were taken as a result.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.