Burgess House

Updated 6 January 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 checked 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 unannounced comprehensive inspection on 25 October 2017 was carried out by one inspector.

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 information we had received about the service such as notifications. This is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also reviewed all other information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority and members of the public.

We spoke with four people who used the service and eight relatives. We observed the interactions between staff and people. We spoke with the registered manager, team leader, a newly appointed team manager and five members of staff including the cook. We received positive feedback from three health and social care professionals.

To help us assess how people’s care needs were being met, we reviewed three people’s care records. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service, recruitment, training, and systems for monitoring the quality of the service.

Updated 6 January 2018

Burgess House provides short-break respite care for up to eight adults with learning difficulties. Subject to availability people and or their representatives can choose the date and length of their stay at the service which is taken from their local authority allocation.

An emergency service for up to two people who are unable to return home is also provided at Burgess House. This means that people move into the service and, for many reasons, may be unable to return home, this could be because of a safe guarding incident for example. These people could be there a few weeks or a few years depending on the situation.

People are referred to the service by the local authority and are supported by staff to find a new place to live.

At the time of this unannounced inspection of 25 October 2017 there were seven people who were present who used the service.

At the last inspection of 23 June 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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 service is run. They were supported by a team leader who was in charge of the day to day running of the service.

The service continued to provide a safe service to people. This included systems in place intended to minimise the risks to people, including from abuse, mobility, nutrition and with their medicines. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities in keeping people safe. They were available when people needed assistance and had been recruited safely.

People and their relatives were complimentary about the care provided and the approach of the team leader and staff. People told us that they felt safe and well cared for. Staff had developed good relationships with people. People were able to express their views and staff listened to what they said and took action to ensure their decisions were acted on. Staff consistently protected people’s privacy and dignity.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. They were also supported to maintain good health and access healthcare services. Systems were in place to receive, record, store and administer medicines safely. Where people required assistance to take their medicines there were arrangements in place to provide this support safely.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and support and were supported to participate in meaningful activities. They received care and support which was planned and delivered to meet their specific needs.

People were supported by staff who were trained and supported to meet their needs. They 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.

The management team and the staff understood their obligations under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The management team knew how to make a referral if required. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People received care that was personalised and responsive to their needs. The service listened to people’s experiences, concerns and complaints and took action where needed.

People, relatives and staff told us the registered manager and team leader were accessible, supportive and had good leadership skills. The service had a quality assurance system and shortfalls were identified and addressed. As a result the quality of the service continued to improve.