Archived: Birkenhead Court

Updated 3 December 2020

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.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

We received information of concern about infection control and prevention measures at this service. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 28 October 2020 and was announced.

Updated 3 December 2020

This inspection took place on 8, 9 and 14 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Birkenhead Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

This is the first inspection of this service under the management of Anchor Carehomes Limited, who registered with CQC to manage this service on 11 November 2017. We last inspected this service on 12April 2016 when it was managed by another provider

Birkenhead Court accommodates 60 people in one adapted building and provides care for people living with dementia. At the time of inspection there were 59 people living in the home. The home has three floors. Each bedroom is en-suite and the building has an additional four bathrooms and four shower rooms. There are four units over the first two floors, each has its own dining and kitchen area with the main kitchen on the top floor.

The home had an experienced and passionate registered manager. 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.

People who lived in the home and their relatives spoke of the outstanding care delivery. They told us that the provider and staff of the home went above and beyond what they expected good care to be, to ensure they received a person-centred service. We saw that interactions between staff and people who used the service were caring and respectful with staff showing patience, kindness and compassion. We observed that staff knew and understood the people they cared for and ensured that people were provided with choices in all aspects of daily life. It was very clear they respected each person's rights and treated them as individuals. Care plans and risk assessments were person-centred and they detailed how people wished and needed to be cared for. They were regularly reviewed and updated as required. We observed a strongly family-orientated service.

Everyone working in the organisation recognised and had access to excellent training that contributed to the outstanding care being delivered. We observed all staff to be skilled in offering help and support to increase the quality of life and promote positive experiences. The registered manager and staff members had started a charity for those people who need support due to either having dementia or being related to someone who has dementia. The excellent support given included how to face the emotional and mental stresses of having dementia and understanding the care and support available.

The registered manager and staff had excelled at providing an environment that was pleasurable for people living with dementia. We saw innovative and forward thinking practices so that the environment was stimulating and comfortable for people living in the home.

We saw evidence of a co-ordinated approach to care delivery with other organisations. This meant that the care being delivered was person-centred and specific to each individual ling in Birkenhead Court. We also saw how individual passions such piano playing was catered for.

Both the registered manager and district manager had strong values relating to the quality of the care being delivered the registered manager told us that all staff of the home acted with integrity and ensured they did not compromise on making sure they did the right thing for people who used the service. This was evident throughout the course of the inspection.

Care records contained detailed information to give staff an exceptional understanding of activities people enjoyed and to improve their social engagement and we saw how this was supported in our observations of staff.

People 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 registered manager and staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions. People were supported to make their own decisions and their choices were respected.

All staff had a very structured and supportive start to their employment, underpinned with shadow shifts and regular supervision. We found staff files contained required documents and checks to protect people from the employment of unsuitable staff. Staff development at Birkenhead Court was exceptional because the registered manager used every opportunity such as medication errors or audit findings as a training session. This led to competent and motivated staff working in the home and in the wider health and social care sector. The skilled workforce had a massive impact on people because it reduced unnecessary hospitalisation.

Medicines records were completed accurately and staff had their competencies periodically checked. Risk assessments for each person who lived at Birkenhead Court were detailed and frequently reviewed to ensure they continued to maintain people's safety.

The service provided personalised, caring and excellent end of life care. The sensitive management team approach meant they could obtain a wealth of information to guide staff about each person's end of life preferences. We saw staff showed genuine sensitivity, compassion and love. This was reflected in conversations with visiting health professionals.

There was a safeguarding policy in place and staff were aware of the procedures in relation to safeguarding adults and all were aware of the need to inform the manager immediately.

There was a range of quality assurance processes in place. These included audits to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service provided. Examples included, medication audits, infection control audits and premises checks. People’s views and opinions on the service provided were regularly sought. For example, there was evidence of satisfaction surveys being carried out. We saw that the registered manager was innovative in how to make people feel safe to express their views comfortably.

The management team had outstanding oversight by scrutinising all areas before issues occurred, which showed they had strong control measures in place. Staff confirmed the registered manager and provider were keen to listen to their ideas and encouraged them to raise any concerns.