Background to this inspection
Updated
24 March 2021
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.
As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.
This inspection took place on 26 February 2021 and was announced.
Updated
24 March 2021
This inspection took place on 25 and 26 July 2018 and was unannounced. One inspector carried out the inspection on both days.
Linkfield Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
Linkfield Court is registered to accommodate up to 29 people. At the time of our inspection 25 older people were living in the home, the majority of whom were living with dementia.
At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
There were two registered managers at the home at the time of the inspection. 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 were treated with kindness, respect and compassion, and their privacy and dignity was upheld.
People were protected from neglect and abuse. Risks were assessed and people were supported to stay safe with the least possible restriction on their freedom. Pre-employment checks were followed to ensure candidates were suitable to work in a care setting.
People’s physical, mental health and social needs were assessed holistically, and care and support was planned and delivered in a personalised way to meet those needs.
People, and where appropriate their families, were involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff had access to appropriate training. The registered managers had invested in specialist dementia care training for all of the staff. They also had training in equality, diversity and human rights to help them challenge and avoid discrimination.
People's rights were protected because the staff acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People and their relatives were encouraged to be involved in decisions about care.
Relatives and friends could visit when they wished without notice.
There were links with the local community.
People had access to meaningful activities and were encouraged to follow interests and hobbies. The activities coordinator post was vacant at the time of inspection.
People made choices about what they ate and drank. Mealtimes were relaxed and sociable occasions, with people receiving the support they needed to eat and drink at their own pace. Dietary needs were assessed and referrals made to dieticians or speech and language therapists as appropriate.
People were supported with their health care needs.
There were sufficient appropriately trained staff on duty to support people in a person-centred way. The service used regular agency staff, whom people knew, to fill any gaps in the rota.
Staff were supported through training, supervision and appraisal to perform their roles effectively.
Staff were valued, respected and supported to develop the service, through supervision, team meetings and ad hoc conversations with the management team. The service was open to the concerns of staff, whether through whistleblowing, supervision and staff meetings, or staff surveys.
Accidents, incidents or near misses were recorded and monitored for developing trends.
The premises were clean and well maintained. Individual bedrooms were furnished and decorated according to people’s preferences.
People were protected from the spread of infection.
Medicines were stored securely and managed safely.
The service sought to support people to have a comfortable and dignified death when nearing end of life.
Clear information about how to make a complaint was available for people. Complaints were taken seriously and investigated openly and thoroughly.
The service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals and other organisations, to ensure people’s care needs were met and that staff kept up with good practice.
The provider had quality assurance processes in place, which helped to maintain standards and drive improvement.