You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Fouracres Care Services. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 23 March 2017

This inspection took place on 21 February 2017 and was unannounced. When we last inspected this service in April 2016 we identified breaches of regulations in relation to medicines management, staff training, supervisions and appraisals, and managerial oversight of the service.

Fouracres is a care home which has been registered to accommodate a maximum of four people with mental health issues and learning disabilities. Fouracres also provides permanent, as well as long-term and short-term respite care to people. On the day of our inspection there was one person using the service.

The home had a registered manager. 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. During the inspection the registered manager was not present. The registered provider and an interim manager were present.

Medicines were now safely managed. At the time of the inspection, medicines were not in use at the service, however all staff had received training, and systems were in place to commence staff competency checks when medicines were next in use at the home. Medicines audits now formed part of the overall quality assurance systems in place at the home.

Staff were now receiving regular supervisions and an annual appraisal with the interim manager. Where a new member of staff had been recruited, they had completed a comprehensive induction which had been signed as completed.

There was now increased managerial oversight of the service. Regular weekly and monthly audits were completed on all aspects of the service.

Detailed current risk assessments were in place for the person who used the service. Risk assessments in place were reviewed and updated regularly. The risk assessments explained the signs to look for when assessing the situation and the least restrictive ways of mitigating the risk based on the individual needs of the person.

Care planning were person centred and reflected what was important to the person. Care needs were regularly reviewed and updated to meet the changing needs of people who use the service.

We saw friendly, caring and supportive interactions between staff and people and staff knew the needs and preferences of the person using the service.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare services.

The service regularly requested feedback from people who used the service, their relatives and professionals involved with the service.

The person was encouraged and supported to access the community and engage in a wide range of activities of their choosing.

Inspection areas



Updated 23 March 2017

The service was now safe. Medicines were safely managed.

Procedures were in place to protect people from abuse.

The risks to people who used the service were identified and managed appropriately.

There were sufficient staff to ensure that people's needs were met.



Updated 23 March 2017

The service was now effective. The service was now carrying out supervisions and appraisals on a regular basis with staff. Staff had access to regular training to carry out their role.

People were given the assistance they required to access healthcare services and maintain good health.

Mental capacity and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards were understood and principles of the code of practice were being followed.



Updated 23 March 2017

The service was caring. We observed caring and positive interactions between staff and the person who used the service.

The person was treated with dignity and respect.

The person was encouraged to develop and maintain independence.



Updated 23 March 2017

The service was responsive. Care plans were person centred.

The person had access to a variety of activities.

The home had a complaints procedure in place and requested feedback from people, relatives and professionals.



Updated 23 March 2017

The service was now well led. The quality of the service was monitored.

Staff spoke positively about management and how they were supported.

Statutory notifications were submitted to CQC.