Brailsford House

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding and good governance. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

People received individualised care which reflected their needs and supported them to manage any risks to their health and wellbeing. Staffing levels were appropriate to keep people safe and provide them with support when they needed it. Not all staff had completed the provider’s required training. The registered manager assured us this would be addressed. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were managed safely. Referrals to community agencies were made when people needed specialist support or equipment to manage their risks. Accidents and incidents were managed appropriately and reported to relevant agencies when necessary. Staff managed people’s medicines safely, in line with national guidance. The home was clean and infection control practices reflected good practice. Regular checks were completed to ensure the safety of equipment and the premises. Some improvements were needed to the service environment, and the provider was in the process of addressing these.

People’s needs were assessed before they came to live at the service and were reviewed regularly to ensure they continued to receive appropriate care. Staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing to ensure any changes could be identified and responded to promptly. Whenpeople needed specialist support with their healthcare needs to improve their health or remain well, this was arranged. Management and staff worked well with community agencies to ensure people received effective, seamless support.

Staff were kind, caring and compassionate. They knew people well, treated them as individuals, and encouraged them to maintain their independence. Staff responded to people’s immediate needs, by contacting healthcare services when people were unwell or providing reassurance and emotional support when people needed it. Staff respected people’s right to privacy and dignity, and people were encouraged to make decisions about their care and everyday lives when they could. People and relatives were happy with the activities and events that took place at the service.

People’s care needs were discussed with them or their relatives regularly to ensure the support they received reflected their needs, wishes and preferences. Staff provided people with person-centred care which reflected what they wanted and needed. People’s views were listened to, and joint decisions were made with them or their relatives about managing any changes to their support needs. People’s communication needs were assessed and reviewed regularly and staff provided them with information they could understand. End-of-life care wishes were discussed with people or their relatives to ensure their end-of-life care would reflect what they wanted.

The provider’s aim was to provide people with person-centred care in a safe, homely environment. Management and staff worked hard to achieve this aim. People received individualised care which reflected their needs, wishes and kept them safe. The registered manager had the knowledge, skills and experience to manage the service effectively and people and relatives told us they were happy with how the service was managed. The registered manager was approachable, helpful and supportive. People, relatives and staff felt able to raise concerns or make suggestions and were confident they would be listened to. Staff were respected and treated fairly. Audits of quality and safety were completed regularly to ensure the service was safe. The audits had not identified the issues regarding staff training we found during the assessment, and the registered manager and provider told us they would review their processes and make improvements.