Archived: Falconer's Court

The inspection took place on 16 November 2016 and was unannounced.

Falconer's Court is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to seven people who live with complex learning and or physical disabilities. There were seven people living at Falconer's Court at the time of this inspection.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

When we last inspected the service on 30 May 2013. We found the service required improvements relating to staffing and quality assurance systems. When we re-inspected the service in September 2013 we found the provider had made the required improvements in respect of the quality monitoring systems in place at the service. The service was inspected in January 2014 and we found they had made the required improvements in respect of staffing. At this inspection we found that the provider was meeting all the regulations.

People felt safe living at Falconer's Court and we observed staff keeping people safe. Staff were aware of how to keep people safe and risks to people's safety and well-being were identified and managed effectively. People's needs were met in a timely way and there were adequate numbers of experienced staff on duty at all times. The provider had a robust recruitment process in place and undertook checks which helped to ensure that staff employed at the service were appropriate to work in a care environment. People's medicines were managed safely and effectively by staff who had been trained in the safe administration of medicines.

Staff were well supported by the management team and had team meetings every month and one to one supervision meetings with their line manager. Staff felt supported, valued and motivated. People received the support they needed to eat a healthy and balanced diet and their health needs were met through access to a range of health care professionals.

People who used the service and their relatives were complimentary about the staff team. Staff respected people’s dignity and privacy and knew about people's individuals' care and support plans and their daily routines as well as their preferences. People and their family and/or care manager’s had been involved in the development and review of their care plans as much as possible. Family and visitors were able to visit at any time they wished and were made welcome by staff and managers.

The provider had systems and processes in place to obtain feedback from people who used the service, their relatives, and care managers about the quality of the services provided. People’s family members were aware of how to raise concerns with the staff or management and were confident that they would be listened to and issues resolved.

The provider had arrangements to monitor health and safety and the quality of the care and support provided for people who used the service. There was an open and transparent culture in the home and staff had clear roles and responsibilities.

We asked the provider to send us a report of the changes they would make to comply with the standards they were not meeting.

We had found that the provider had taken action to ensure the appropriate checks were carried out before staff commenced employment at the home.

We asked the provider to send us a report of the changes they would make to comply with the standards they were not meeting.

We found that the provider could demonstrate that people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

We found that the provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

We found that people were not protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment.

We found at this inspection that there was an effective complaints system in place. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.

We also carried out a routine inspection to look at other essential standards of quality and safety were being met.

We found that people were involved where possible in the planning of their care and that where they were unable to contribute, their relatives had been involved.

We found people were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment.

We found people were not cared for, supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

We found that the provider did not have an effective system in place to regularly monitor the quality of service that people receive.

We saw that the service maintained good care plans and people profiles. We also saw that the staff had the skills, training and confidence that met individual assessed needs.

Relatives we spoke to told us that they were happy with the care being provided by the home. Comments included 'staff really cares about people living in the home' and 'I have every confidence in the staff and the care they provide".