You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 June 2019

About the service: About the service: Ross Court Care Home is a care home without nursing, providing care for up to 42 older people. There were 37 at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

• People liked living at Ross Court Care Home and had developed close bonds with the staff who cared for them.

• Staff supported people to maintain their independence and cared for people in ways which showed them they were valued and respected.

• People were involved in decisions about their care. Where people needed help to make their own choices, staff supported them to do this.

• There was sufficient staff to meet people’s safety needs, but people told us there were occasions when staff did not time to spend socialising with them. Staff told us they would like more time to chat to people but told us new staff had recently been appointed and this had led to improvements. The registered manager and provider kept staffing levels under review and provided assurances they would check the deployment of staff, so people would continue to have their preferences met.

• Staff understood how to recognise the signs of abuse and knew the risks to people’s safety. People were supported to stay as safe as possible. Staff were confident if they raised any concerns these would be promptly addressed.

• Some people enjoyed the independence of managing their own medicines. Where people were supported to have their medicines safely and checks were undertaken to ensure these were administered as prescribed.

• Staff had been trained to understand how to reduce the risk of infections and accidental and used their knowledge and equipment provided to do this.

• People’s needs were assessed, and their views were incorporated into their can plans, so their needs would be met in the ways they preferred. Where appropriate, people’s relatives and other health and social care providers were consulted when people’s care was planned.

• Staff were supported to provide good care to people though induction programmed and training. Staff highlighted their development opportunities were linked to the needs of the people living at the home.

• People and their relatives were positive about their dining experiences. Relatives and staff gave examples showing how people’s health had improved because of the support they received to have enough to eat.

• Other health and social care professionals told us staff knew people’s health and well-being needs well, and effective systems were in place to work across organisations, to people support people to enjoy good health.

• 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.

• Staff knew how people enjoyed spending their time and supported people to do things they enjoyed and widen their experiences. This included people’s spiritual needs being met, and opportunities to do individual activities in the community. This enhanced people’s sense of well-being and quality of life.

• Systems were in place to take any learning from complaints and accidents and incidents, and to drive through improvements in people’s care.

• Relatives told us the care provided to people at the end of their lives reflected their family member’s wishes and preferences. Relatives emphasised how supportive staff were and how sensitively both their relatives and they had been treated at this important stage of their lives.

• The registered manager and provider checked the quality of the care provided. Where areas had been highlighted for further development action plans were put in place.

• The provider and registered manager reflected on feedback received and used this information to enhance people’s experience of care further. The provider also took learning from feedback to develop their audits, so they were assured they were meeting their obligations.

• We found the service m

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 June 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 June 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our Effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 June 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our Caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 June 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 6 June 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our Well-led findings below.