Archived: Briars Rest Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records. We also spoke with Lancashire council's contracts monitoring team.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe and their rights and dignity were respected. They told us they were receiving safe and appropriate care which was meeting their needs. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to safeguard people they supported. The home had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Relevant staff understood when an application should be made and in how to submit one. This meant that people would be safeguarded as required.

Equipment had been maintained and serviced regularly ensuring people were not put at unnecessary risk. People living at the home told us they were happy and well looked after.

We found the service wasn't always safe, clean and hygienic. A number of carpets in unoccupied rooms were found to be dirty and badly stained. Some rooms had wallpaper peeling off and were badly in need of redecoration. The home were unable to produce a Periodic Inspection and Testing certificate confirming electrical systems were maintained in a safe working condition. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to infection control and safety of the premises.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs had been assessed with them or where appropriate their relative, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary needs had been identified where required. Care plans had risk assessments completed to identify the potential risk of accidents and harm. Staff members we spoke with confirmed guidance was provided to ensure they provided safe and appropriate care. We found the care plans were flexible, regularly reviewed for their effectiveness and changed in recognition of the changing needs of the person. People spoken with said their care plans were up to date and reflected their current needs.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. The people we spoke with were happy with the care being provided. One person said, 'I am very happy. We are well fed and looked after. I have just had a lovely meal and I am off to the lounge to sleep it off.' Another person said, 'I love it here. The home has a really good atmosphere and we all get on really well. The staff are very approachable caring people.'

A visiting healthcare professional told us they were happy with the care being provided to the person they were visiting.

We saw the deployment of staff at lunch time was organised. People who had been identified as being at risk from poor nutrition had a care worker allocated to assist them to eat their meals. We observed staff members were attentive to the needs of people who required assistance. Care plans had been maintained recording the care and support people were receiving. Good care practices were observed and people told us they were happy with the support they were receiving.

Is the service responsive?

Records showed admissions to the home were well planned. Information about people's care and dietary needs had been recorded. We also saw potential risks to people's health and welfare had been identified. Guidance had been provided for staff to ensure they provided safe and appropriate care. We found people had access to healthcare professionals. People received regular health checks with their General Practitioner and the outcome of these visits were recorded on their care records.

Is the service well-led?

There were no records available to show how identified problems and opportunities to change things for the better were addressed promptly. There were no procedures in place to gather information about the safety and quality of service provided. People supported were not asked for feedback about the quality of service provided. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to quality assurance.

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and managing the regulated activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time.

The provider was told improvements to the homes recruitment procedures were required by 18th October 2013.

The provider responded by sending the Care Quality Commission (CQC) an action plan of how they had addressed the findings from the previous inspection.

During this inspection we found one new staff member had been recruited to work at the home. We found their recruitment had been safe with all appropriate documentation being obtained before they commenced their employment. The checks undertaken confirmed the person was of good character and had the skills and experience to work at the home.

However, we did look at the recruitment practices in respect of two newly appointed members of staff. We also looked at the recruitment file of a third person who had yet to start their employment at the home.

We saw that people were still at risk. This was because the registered manager had allowed a new member of staff to start their employment at the home without ensuring that all the proper checks and clearances had been received. This meant that the registered manager did not have sufficient information to make an informed decision to ensure that only suitable people were employed.

We spoke with all but two of the people living at the Briars Care Home either individually or in a small group. One person told us, 'Things are better now. The meals are better too. Today we had steak pie, it was very nice'. The same person went on to say, 'When I press the buzzer they come straight away, before I sometimes had to wait up to 30 minutes. It's alright here'. Another person described the staff as, 'Very understanding and helpful'.

We saw that people all had a detailed care plan that was up to date. This meant that staff were instructed and guided on how best to assist people. From discussion with the the staff on duty, it was clear that they understood the individual needs and requirements of each person.

Although we could not see the staff training matrix, we were told that by the registered manager staff had received a range of training. This had included induction to the home training. Both new members of staff were experienced and had achieved or almost achieved, a nationally recognised care qualification.

There were a sufficient number of staff on duty to meet peoples' assessed needs. Nobody living at the home expressed any concerns or complaint.

We found that improvements had been made. Staffing levels throughout the waking day had, in the main, been reinstated to former levels. This ensured that the assessed needs of people living at the home could be adequately met. We also noted that improvements had been made to the internal quality monitoring systems in place. This helped to keep people safe.