Archived: Manchester Court

Manchester Court is a care home that provides accommodation and personal care for up to 20 adults who are living with a mental health condition in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection 14 people were living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

There was an inconsistent approach to the management of risks associated with choking, falling and the management of people’s medicines.

We were partially assured with some aspects of IPC practice in response to the pandemic. However we have signposted the registered manager to relevant guidance.

The provider's audit system had not always identified all shortfalls in quality and risks to people using the service.

We found all required staff recruitment checks had not been completed on staff, before they delivered people's care. We made a recommendation to support good recruitment practice.

People were protected from harm and abuse through the knowledge of staff and management.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part by notification of a specific incident. Following which a person using the service died. This incident is subject to a Coroner’s investigation. As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident.

The information CQC received about the incident indicated concerns about the management of choking. This inspection examined those risks.

We inspected and found there was a concern with the management of risks to people such as choking and falls, so we widened the scope of the inspection to become a focused inspection which included the key questions of Safe and Well-led

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

The overall rating for the service has changed from Good to Requires Improvement. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Manchester Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Enforcement

We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection.

We have identified breaches in relation to Safe care and treatment and Good governance.

We have made a recommendation about staff recruitment procedures.

Follow up

We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Manchester Court is a care home that provides accommodation and personal care for up to 20 adults who are living with a mental health condition. At the time of the inspection 18 people were living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People and their relatives told us they were happy with the care they received and felt safe living there. A relative said; “Mum is happy, and she would say if she wasn’t.” One person said; “I do feel safe living here.” People looked happy and comfortable with staff supporting them. Staff were caring and spent time chatting with people as they moved around the service.

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

People were supported by staff who completed an induction, training and were supervised. Staff were recruited safely in sufficient numbers to ensure people’s needs were met. There was time for people to have social interaction and activities with staff. Staff knew how to keep people safe from harm.

The environment was safe, with upgrades ongoing and people had access to equipment where needed.

Staff received appropriate training and support to enable them to carry out their role safely, including fire safety and mental health training.

People were supported to access healthcare services, staff recognised changes in people's health, and sought professional advice appropriately.

Records of people's care were individualised and reflected each person’s needs and preferences. Risks were identified, and staff had guidance to help them support people to reduce the risk of avoidable harm. People’s communication needs were identified, and some people had end of life wishes explored and recorded.

People were involved in menu planning and staff encouraged them to eat a well-balanced diet and make healthy eating choices. Special diets were catered for.

People were supported by a service that was well managed. Records were accessible and up to date. The management and staff knew people well and worked together to help ensure people received a good service.

People, their relatives, a visiting health care professional and staff told us the management of the service were ‘hands on’, approachable and listened when any concerns or ideas were raised. One relative said; “They (the registered manager) is lovely and very approachable.”

People and their families were provided with information about how to make a complaint and details of the complaint’s procedure were displayed at the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good. (Report published on 14 June 2017.)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

At the last inspection in November 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People told us they were happy living at Manchester Court and that they felt safe. People received individualised care which reflected their personal preferences, wishes and routines. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People’s care records were kept up to date with their changing needs. By closely working with health care professionals the risks to people’s health and well-being were reduced. People were supported to eat a healthy diet. They were encouraged to make choices about their care and support and to be as independent as possible. People were treated with dignity, respect and kindness.

People were supported by staff who had access to training and support to acquire and maintain the skills and knowledge they needed to meet their needs. Staff were supported to develop in their roles.

People’s views were sought as part of the quality assurance process to drive through improvements to the service. A range of quality assurance systems monitored the standards of care provided. The registered manager valued the feedback from people, their relatives and staff and acted on their suggestions.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

We followed up three compliance actions which we issued following the inspection on the 8 November 2012. We found these had all been met.

Care records contained details of people's needs and how they liked to be supported. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of people's needs.

People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink.

At this inspection we found that the provider had re-decorated the majority of the home. We found the communal areas had been repainted and new flooring fitted in the entrance hall and on the stairways. New flooring had also been fitted in some people's bedrooms. Some bedrooms were in the process of being refurbished. All the unsafe equipment had been replaced.

Some people had been reviewed by external health care professionals and they had been provided with new beds, mattresses and other equipment required to meet their needs. We saw new chairs were in the lounge as the old ones were damaged.

We spoke with three people who all said the new decor was an improvement and a member of staff also felt the same.

A system had been put in place to regularly assess and monitor the service provision and this included obtaining the views of people and staff.

We felt that the re-decoration had greatly improved the environment for people.

Staff told us it was a nice a place to work and they felt well supported by other staff and the management of the home.

We observed the staff treating people with respect.

We found concerns with the upkeep of the environment and the cleanliness. Some of the equipment used by people was in a poor state of repair. Staff were not receiving training pertinent to their role.

Quality monitoring of the service had failed to identify areas that required improvement.