Archived: Bennett House

Updated 26 February 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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 inspection took place on 16 January 2019 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social are inspector and one expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

We looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR) the provider had sent us. 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.

Before the inspection we asked for information from the local authority and we checked the website of Healthwatch for any additional information about the home. We reviewed the information we already held about the service and any feedback we had received.

During our visit we spoke with five people who used the service, three people’s relatives and five members of staff. We also spoke with a visiting physiotherapist and district nurse. We looked at care notes for three people who used the service, medication storage and records, three staff records, accident and incident report forms, health and safety records, complaints records and other records for the management of the home.

During our inspection, we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). This involved observing staff interactions with people in their care. SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Updated 26 February 2019

This inspection took place on 16 January 2019 and was unannounced.

Bennett House is a residential care home for 45 people some of whom live with dementia. The home has four units over one ground floor. These are called Primrose, Rosebud, Jasmine and Bluebell. At the time of inspection there where 38 people living in the home.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

Medications were safely managed. People who lived in the home and relatives we spoke with all gave positive feedback about the home and the staff who worked in it. The service had a relaxed feel and people could move freely around the service as they chose. People were able to have control over their lives and participate in activities they enjoyed.

Care plans and risk assessments were person centred and detailed how people wished and needed to be supported. They were regularly reviewed and updated as required showed that people's GPs and other healthcare professionals were contacted for advice about people's health needs whenever necessary. We saw the service had responded promptly when people had experienced health problems.

The registered manager and provider used different methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits of the service and staff meetings to seek the views of staff about the service. The staff team were consistent and the providers were also involved in the running of the service.

Staff were recruited safely, received a robust induction and suitable training to do their job role effectively. All staff had been supervised in their role.

The home had carried out various checks to ensure the environment was safe and infection control processes were in place. The home had up to date policies in place for staff guidance.

The registered manager had signed up to two pilots regarding oral health of people living in the home and staff training to reduce hospital admissions. This meant the registered manager and staff put people at the centre of the care being delivered.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.