We carried out a review of the data available to us about Grove 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 Grove Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Grove Court is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 60 people aged 65 and over. At the time of the inspection there were 57 people, some were living with dementia. It is a purpose- built care home consisting of three separate wings, each of which has separate adapted facilities.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received care that was extremely personalised and responsive to their specific needs and preferences. Significant emphasis was placed on providing meaningful activities which promoted people’s physical and emotional wellbeing and enriched their lives.
Feedback was overwhelmingly positive from people, relatives, visitors and professionals about the extremely compassionate and caring approach of staff who regularly went above and beyond to care for them.
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 consistently consulted on all aspects of their care and treated with dignity and respect in a way that truly valued them as individuals. When the time came staff respected people’s wishes and provided them with exceptional, holistic, dignified, end of life care.
The leadership of the service was exceptional. The registered manager, supported by their senior management team, had established a person- centered culture amongst the staff team, that consistently delivered high quality care. Staff were extremely motivated and passionate about their role and clear on their responsibilities. Robust quality assurance systems had sustained continual development and improvement in the home leading to positive outcomes for people.
Staff were well-informed about people’s risks and how to care for them safely. Staff received training in safeguarding adults from harm and had a positive attitude to reporting concerns. The management team regularly reviewed staffing arrangements to ensure there were enough staff with the right skills and experience to care and support people. People’s medicines were managed safely. The home was visibly clean throughout.
People, relatives and staff contributed to the development of ongoing care arrangements and the wider issues within the home. Their feedback was valued and acted on by the management team. People, relatives and visitors expressed confidence that they could raise issues or concerns with any member of staff or the management team and that these would be addressed.
Grove Court continued to be an active presence within the local community. Strong community links had been maintained with different community groups regularly visiting and people accessing the local area.
Since our last inspection, under the leadership of the registered manager the home has gone from strength to strength making positive changes that demonstrate the characteristics of an outstanding service.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 09 December 2016).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC 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.
There were enough staff to support people safely and they were clear about their roles. Recruitment practices were robust in contributing to protecting people from staff who were unsuitable to work within the care profession.
Staff knew what to do if they suspected someone may be being abused or harmed and medicines were managed and stored properly and safely so that people received them as the prescriber intended.
Staff had received the training they needed to understand how to meet people’s needs, including dementia training. They understood the importance of gaining consent from people before delivering their care or treatment. Where people were not able to give informed consent, staff and the manager ensured their rights were protected.
People had enough to eat and drink to meet their needs and staff assisted or prompted people with meals and fluids if they needed support.
Staff treated people with warmth and compassion. They were respectful of people’s privacy and dignity and offered comfort and reassurance when people were distressed or unsettled. Staff also made sure that people who became unwell were referred promptly to healthcare professionals for treatment and advice about their health and welfare.
Staff showed commitment to understanding and responding to each person’s preferences and needs so that they could engage meaningfully with people on an individual basis. The service offered people a chance to take part in activities and pastimes that were tailored to their preferences and wishes. Outings and outside entertainment was offered to people, and staff offered people activities and supported them on a daily basis.
Staff understood the importance of responding to and resolving concerns quickly if they were able to do so. Staff also ensured that more serious complaints were passed on to the management team for investigation. People and their representatives told us that they were confident that complaints they made would be addressed by the manager.
The service had good leadership; we found an open and positive culture that supported people in a person centred way. The staff told us that the manager was supportive and easy to talk to. The manager was responsible for monitoring the quality and safety of the service and was supported by the operations manager and the providers visited the service regularly the check the quality of the service. People were asked for their views so that any needed improvements were identified were made where possible.
We spoke with four staff, the manager and five people who used the service on the day of our inspection.
People were treated with dignity and respect and reported staff as kind and caring. People told us, "Wonderful staff", "Can't fault them" and "They go out of their way and then one step further."
We found that the service was providing a good level of care to people. Risk assessments were appropriate to the needs of each individual and were reviewed in line with the provider's policy. Guidelines were in place to ensure that people's care was well managed.
The provider had effective quality assurance and safeguarding procedures in place. We found that staff received regular training and support.
We found that the service had suitable arrangements in place for obtaining the consent of people who used the service. One person we spoke with said,"They definitely respect your wishes, they respect privacy and they never just pop in unannounced."
People were protected against the risks of receiving inappropriate care or treatment. We saw that care was well planned and recorded properly and we observed care being given as written in care plans. One person we spoke with told us, "The staff are so good and caring. They are kind and have a good attitude to people - never in a rush or at all flustered."
We reviewed 10 medicine administration record (MAR) charts and checked that medicines were properly stored, administered and disposed of. We found that people were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines.
From speaking with staff, reviewing staff records and recruitment procedures we saw that the provider met requirements relating to recruiting and employing workers. We also saw that the provider had an effective complaints system and we saw that comments and complaints were listened to and acted on effectively. One relative we spoke with told us, "Whenever we've had any concerns we've raised them straight away and they have been dealt with."
The majority of people we spoke with told us that they felt the home supported them with their particular needs and that they liked living at the home.