We carried out a review of the data available to us about Pennystone Court on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Pennystone Court, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had set up clear visiting and testing arrangements for essential care givers and three named visitors for people in the home. There were a number of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) stations around the home and at appropriate places between floors and communal areas. Staff had received additional training to support them during the pandemic and had been given handy pocket-sized guides to putting on and taking off their PPE. The home was large and had a number of communal areas. Steps had been taken to remove any items which could pose a risk of cross contamination, but areas remained inviting, safe spaces where social distancing guidelines could be respected. The home had interactive technology for people to remain in contact with family and friends.
At the last inspection the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
We observed staff providing support to people throughout our inspection visit. We saw they were kind and patient and treated people with dignity and respect.
People who lived at the home and their visitors told us they were happy with the care provided. Comments received included, “The care is wonderful. The staff are very nice and knowledgeable.” And, “I cannot fault the staff and the care I receive. It’s lovely here.”
The service had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.
Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.
Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs. During the inspection we observed three staff members attending manual handling training.
The service had sufficient staffing levels in place to provide support people required. People told us staff were responsive and available when they needed them.
Medication procedures at the home were safe. Staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medicines were safely kept with appropriate arrangements for storing in place.
We looked around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and hygienic and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required.
The design of the building and facilities provided were appropriate for the care and support provided.
The service had safe infection control procedures in place and staff had received infection control training. Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when needed. This reduced the risk of cross infection.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
Staff knew people they supported and provided a personalised service in a caring and professional manner. Care plans were organised and had identified care and support people required. We found they were informative about care people had received.
People told us they were happy with the variety and choice of meals available to them. We saw regular snacks and drinks were provided between meals to ensure people received adequate nutrition and hydration.
We saw people had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met. The service had responded promptly when people had experienced health problems.
People told us staff were caring towards them. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of high standards of care to give people meaningful lives.
People’s care and support was planned with them. People told us they had been consulted and listened to about how their care would be delivered.
The service had information with regards to support from an external advocate should this be required by them.
The service had a complaints procedure which was made available to people on their admission to the home and their relatives. People we spoke with told us they were happy and had no complaints.
The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits and relative surveys to seek their views about the service provided.
This inspection visit took place on 11 August 2015 and was unannounced.
At the last inspection on 26 November 2013 the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations that were inspected at that time.
Pennystone Court is registered to provide personal care for 36 people. The home is purpose built and is constructed on two floors comprising of 36 single occupancy flatlets. The ground floor is designated to provide care for people who have dementia. All rooms are en-suite providing toilet and bathing facilities. Communal areas consist of a lounge and dining room on each floor. At the time of our inspection visit there were 35 people who lived there.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report any unsafe care or abusive practices. People who lived at the home told us they felt safe and their rights and dignity were respected.
We found recruitment procedures were safe with appropriate checks undertaken before new staff members commenced their employment. Staff spoken with and records seen confirmed a structured induction training and development programme was in place.
Staff received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and support needs. We found staffing levels were sufficient with an appropriate skill mix to meet the needs of people. The deployment of staff was well managed and provided people with support to meet their needs.
People were happy with the variety and choice of meals available to them. Regular snacks and drinks were provided between meals to ensure people received adequate nutrition and hydration. The cook had information about people’s dietary needs and these were being met.
We found people who lived at the home and were living with dementia were supported to be as independent as possible. At lunch time we observed staff encouraging people to eat their meal independently.
Care plans we looked at confirmed the registered manager had completed an assessment of people’s support needs before they moved into the home. We saw people or a family member had been involved in the assessment and had consented to the support being provided. People we spoke with said they were happy with their care and they liked living at the home.
The environment was well maintained, clean and hygienic when we visited. No offensive odours were observed by the Inspection team. The people we spoke with said they were happy with the standard of hygiene in place. One person visiting the home said, “The home is always clean and smells fresh whenever I visit. My [relative’s] room is spotless.”
We found medication procedures in place were safe. Staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medicines were safely kept and appropriate arrangements for storing were in place. People told us they received their medicines at the times they needed them.
People’s health needs were being met and any changes in health managed well. The people we spoke with said they had access to healthcare professionals when they needed them.
People told us they were happy with the activities arranged to keep them entertained. One person said, “They are always doing something with us there is never a dull moment.” A visiting relative said, “I am very impressed with the activities they organise. My [relative] doesn’t attend through choice but I always notice how much people are enjoying themselves.”
The service had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Discussion with the registered manager confirmed she understood when an application should be made and in how to submit one. This meant that people would be safeguarded as required.
The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included questionnaires which were issued to people to encourage feedback about the service they had received. The people we spoke with during our inspection visit told us they were satisfied with the service they were receiving.
We were supported on this inspection by an Expert by Experience. This is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
The Expert by Experience spoke with a number of people. Comments received were all positive about the care being provided. People told us they felt safe in the care of staff. One person said, “The staff are wonderful. I don’t know how they have the patience to deal with some of the people here”. A visiting relative said, “My mum wouldn’t be in here if I wasn’t satisfied with her care.
We found staff had been trained and appropriate support arrangements were in place for them. Good care practices were observed and people were found to be having their nutritional needs met.
During our inspection we contacted the Blackpool contracts monitoring team. They told us they had no concerns about the home.
We also spoke with Lancashire fire & rescue service. They told us they had issued an action plan for some minor works when they last visited the home. We were able to confirm during the inspection the work requested had been completed.
People told us they had no concerns about the care being provided. They told us they felt safe and protected from potential harm. They said they were happy with their care and the staff were responsive to their needs. We were told they were consulted about the service being provided and felt their views were listened to.
"I looked around the home with my family and was very impressed. It was bright and airy and had no unpleasant odours. Everyone looked so clean and comfortable. They had activities going on and we could see people having fun. Have never regretted my decision to live here".
"Very happy thank you. The manager and her staff are all lovely caring people. The accommodation is first class, excellent food and entertainment. What more could you want".
"The girls are hard working and very kind. They look after me very well".
"Always being asked if I am happy with my care. The staff are very kind".
"I choose to remain in my room as I am very comfortable. I have everything I could possibly need. The staff are very respectful and always knock on my door before entering".
"I attend regular meetings to discuss my care and the running of the home. They really encourage us to have our say about anything and everything. I always feel I have been listened to".