The inspection visit was unannounced, and was carried out on 17 January 2017. The home was last inspected in September 2015 when we found the service required improvement.

Broomhaven is a care home providing care to three people with learning disabilities. Broomhaven is located in a residential area of Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in a quiet street and has the appearance of a domestic dwelling. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the home.

The service has a 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. The registered manager for Broomhaven was also the registered provider, as they owned and ran the service.

During the inspection people told us, or indicated that they were very happy with their life at Broomhaven. Staff we spoke with and observed understood people’s needs and preferences well. Staff spoke to people with patience and respect, and took time to make sure that people experienced good quality support.

The registered manager had taken appropriate steps to make sure that people’s mental capacity was assessed and that care was provided in accordance with people’s consent. Staff had received training in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2015, and understood its impact on how they provided care and support.

The registered manager had systems in place to ensure people’s safety. This included staff’s training and knowledge about safeguarding, and up to date risk assessments. The arrangements for managing medicines were appropriate.

There was an effective and improved audit system in place, which monitored the quality of care provided and the safe running of the service.

The inspection visit was unannounced, and was carried out on 22 September 2015. It was undertaken by an adult social care inspector. The home’s last inspection was in November 2014 where breaches of regulations were identified, and enforcement action was taken.

Broomhaven is a three bed care home, providing care to adults with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the home. It is staffed by a small team of two care assistants, one senior care assistant and the registered manager, who also owns the business.

Broomhaven is located in a residential area of Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in a quiet street and has the appearance of a domestic dwelling.

The service has a 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the inspection people told us, or indicated, that they were very happy with their experience of life at Broomhaven. Staff we spoke with and observed understood people’s needs and preferences well. Staff spoke to people with patience and respect, and took time to ensure that people experienced good quality support.

The provider had taken appropriate steps to ensure that people’s mental capacity was assessed and that care was provided in accordance with people’s consent. Staff had received training in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2015, and understood its impact on how they provided care and support.

The provider had systems in place to ensure people’s safety. This included staff’s training and knowledge about safeguarding, and up to date risk assessments. However, some risk assessments were lacking detail. The arrangements for managing prescription medicines were adequate, but improvements were required to ensure that homely remedies were safely managed.

There was an effective and improved audit system in place, which monitored the quality of care provided and the safe running of the service. This system was relatively new, so it was not yet clear whether it was contributing to long term improvements in the home.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We spoke with two people who used the service to gain their views and experiences of the service. One person communicated their views by using Makaton, staff assisted to translate their views. Makaton is a language using signs and symbols to help people to communicate. It is designed to support spoken language and the signs and symbols are used with speech, in spoken word order.

People who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. They were encouraged to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.

Throughout our visit, we saw that staff treated people with dignity and kindness. We observed that a friendly and positive approach was used, to ensure that the wishes and needs of people using the service were respected.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

People received care and treatment from suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work.

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because their records had been reviewed and updated regularly.

Each person had a detailed assessment of their needs, and from this care plans and risk assessments were devised. We saw evidence that people had care plans and risk assessments which met all their needs.

People’s records were up to date and regularly reviewed so that they remained current and reflected people’s care and support needs

We were not able to communicate with people present on the day of the inspection, so we therefore used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. Using SOFI we saw that staff took time to communicate with people using their preferred communication methods. We saw that staff ensured that they engaged with people, and that people had the opportunity to undertake a range of activities with staff support.

The inspection was announced. Normally our inspections are unannounced, however, on this occasion we gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as the service is a very small one and we wanted to make sure that people would be at home, and that the manager would be available. The inspection visit was carried out over two days; 5 and 6 November 2014. The home’s last inspection was in November 2013 where it was judged compliant with the regulations inspected.

Broomhaven is a three bed care home, providing care to adults with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the home. It is staffed by a small team of two care assistants, one senior care assistant and the registered manager, who also owns the business.

Broomhaven is located in a residential area of Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in a quiet street and has the appearance of a domestic dwelling.

The service has a 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the inspection people told us, or indicated, that they enjoyed the range of activities available in the home, and enjoyed living there. Staff we spoke with and observed knew people’s needs and preferences well, and had a good knowledge of their history and circumstances.

We found that staff received some training, however the provider’s own records in relation to this were poor, and did not support what the provider had told us in relation to training. Likewise, one staff member told us that they received supervision and appraisal, but another told us this did not happen. There were no records available to evidence whether supervision or appraisal took place. The registered manager said that he had taken all these records home as he was working on them.

In our observations in the inspection, we found that staff did not always show people using the service a high degree of respect, and we identified occurrences where one staff member spoke to people in a brusque and infantilising manner. We told the registered manager about this, however he told us that this was “just how [the staff member] is.”

The provider did not have any formal systems in place for monitoring and auditing the quality of service people received. There had been a system of quality meetings in the past, however, these had ended over 18 months ago and nothing had replaced them. The registered manager could not describe any ways that he monitored the quality of the service apart from “looking round, checking it’s all okay.” The registered manager was unfamiliar with the regulations and standards that he was required to comply with, and many of the policies and procedures he had devised reflected this lack of knowledge.

We found a number of breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.