Archived: Budlake Residential Home

At the time of this inspection an application to deregister the home had been submitted by Guinness Care and Support. The application was being considered by the Care Quality Commission

Is the service safe?

The providers had taken prompt action when concerns were raised to make sure people were safe. Staffing levels were increased and people were taken out each day while builders were present in the home. Risks such as unsafe medicine administration and the risk of choking had been addressed.

We also saw building works had been carried out to improve the safety of the building as well as the comfort of the home for the people living there.

Is the service responsive?

The providers responded promptly and took sufficient actions to address matters when concerns were raised with them. Actions had been taken to improve the management structure by allocating a team leader to the home. The team leader told us things had improved. The registered manager also told us they realised there were areas that needed improvement and they had taken action to resolve them.

We had planned to use a tool called SOFI 2 (Short Observational framework for Inspection) but because of the external activities undertaken by people living at the home this was not possible so instead we spent time with people living at the home as they prepared their lunchtime meal. We joined people as they ate their lunch and this helped us make a judgment about their well-being and staff practice.

We saw that staff treated people with consideration and respect. Staff were able to recognise when people wanted reassurance and when they wanted their own space. People looked comfortable and content.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw that people looked at ease with staff, for example choosing to spend time with staff in communal areas. Staff were clear about their role to protect people.

Staff told us people were able to make their views known about daily events. There were also meetings to try and gather the views of people living at Budlake by talking with people who were important to them.

During our inspection, we met three people who lived at Budlake. There was one vacancy. People were not able to verbally communicate their views on the care so we spent time with them in communal areas to help us understand what life was like at the home. To do this we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection 2 (SOFI 2) to help us make a judgment on the quality of people's care.

We saw that people looked well cared for and were dressed appropriately, which reflected information in their care plans. We saw that people looked relaxed as they moved about the home and showed affection towards staff, who recognised people's need for a gentle and reassuring approach. Staff treated people as individuals and recognised their right to have one to one time, and time away from each other.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw that people looked at ease with staff, for example choosing to spend time with staff in communal areas. Staff were clear about their role to protect people.

However, improvements are needed to ensure that decisions around finances are always based on people's best interests. and The service's quality assurance system needs to be more effective in monitoring the quality of care.