Birkdale Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We assessed a limited number of quality statements in the effective key question and found areas of concern. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests, the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. Whilst people were supported to make day to day decisions themselves, systems in place to assess people’s mental capacity were insufficient which meant people were not always supported in the least restrictive way. The provider did not always undertake their own mental capacity assessments which meant they relied on outdated mental capacity assessments which may not have always been an accurate assessment of people’s capacity on that date and placed them at risk of being unlawfully deprived of their liberty.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People told us care was provided in the way they liked and they were asked for consent before care was provided. One person told us they did not always like staff washing them but if they told them, they would go away and come back again later. A relative told us, "They do involve my relative in decisions about their care. They do leave them to it and let them wear what they want."

Staff understood the need to ask for consent prior to supporting people with their care. The registered manager and staff did not always understand it was their responsibility to undertake mental capacity assessments when needed and ensure people were not being unlawfully deprived of their liberty.

Mental capacity assessments were not always completed when needed. For example, no consent had been sought and no mental capacity assessments had been completed in respect to the use of CCTV in the home. Where they had been completed, outcomes were not always recorded so people’s capacity was not always clear. People’s care records were not always consistent in respect to capacity. For example, one person’s records stated they had capacity for health and wellbeing decisions but also stated they had no insight into their condition. This meant people were at risk of being unlawfully deprived of their liberty and not being able to make independent decisions.