You are here

Manor Community Care Home Outstanding

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 22 November 2016

This inspection took place on 27 and 28 June 2016 and was unannounced. The previous inspection was carried out April 2013 and there had been no breaches of legal requirements at that time. We had no previous concerns prior to this inspection.

The service provides accommodation for up to 10 people with mental health needs and who may also have a secondary diagnosis of learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our visit there were nine people living at the service. There was a registered manager in post. 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 views of people were sought in a way that was informal, relaxed and tailored to their individual needs. This demonstrated a person centred ethos and creativity and, ensured any barriers to effective communication were overcome. They used a sensitive approach that respected people’s cultural backgrounds and mental health needs. We found during our visit that spending time with people and talking about things important to them, was an approach they were more familiar and comfortable with and enabled us to assess their experience of the service more effectively than asking more direct questions. Staff supported this and introduced us to everyone individually and explained why we were visiting.

The registered manager listened to people and staff to ensure there were enough staff to meet people's needs. They demonstrated their responsibilities in recognising changing circumstances within the service and used a risk based approach to help ensure that staffing levels and the staff skill mix was effective.

Staff had the knowledge and skills they needed to carry out their roles effectively. They enjoyed training and sharing what they had learnt with colleagues. Staff were supported by the provider and the registered manager at all times. The service complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People received a varied nutritious diet, suited to individual preferences and requirements. Mealtimes were flexible and taken in a setting where people chose. Staff took prompt action when people required access to community services for expert treatment or advice.

Staff had a good awareness of individuals' needs and treated people in a warm and respectful manner. It was evident that they were committed to the people they supported. The registered manager and staff were knowledgeable about people's lives before they started using the service. Every effort was made to enhance this knowledge so that their life experiences remained meaningful.

People received appropriate care and support because there were effective systems in place to assess, plan, implement, monitor and evaluate people's needs. People were involved throughout these processes. This ensured their needs were clearly identified and the support they received was meaningful and personalised. Regular monitoring and reviews meant that referrals had been made to appropriate health and social care professionals and where necessary care and support had been changed to accurately reflect people's needs. People experienced a lifestyle that met their individual expectations, capacity and preferences.

Everyone involved in this inspection demonstrated a genuine passion for the roles they performed and individual responsibilities. They wanted to ensure that those living at the service felt safe and valued. Staff embraced new initiatives with the support of the registered manager and colleagues. They continued to look at the needs of people who used the service and ways to improve these so that people felt empowered to make positive changes.

Inspection areas



Updated 22 November 2016

The service was safe.

Staff had received training in safeguarding so they would recognise abuse and know what to do if they had any concerns.

People received care from staff who took steps to protect them from unnecessary harm. Risks had been appropriately assessed and staff had been provided with clear guidance on the management of identified risks.

There were enough skilled, experienced staff on duty to support people safely.

People were protected through the homes recruitment procedures. These procedures helped ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

People were protected against the risks associated with unsafe use and management of medicines.



Updated 22 November 2016

The service was effective.

People received good standards of care from staff who understood their needs and preferences. Staff were encouraged and keen to learn new skills and increase their knowledge and understanding

People made decisions and choices about their care. Staff were confident when supporting people unable to make choices themselves, to make decisions in their best interests in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People had access to a healthy diet which promoted their health and well-being, taking into account their nutritional requirements and personal preferences.

The service recognised the importance of seeking advice from community health and social care professionals so that people's health and wellbeing was promoted and protected.



Updated 22 November 2016

The service was caring.

The provider, registered manager and staff were fully committed to providing people with the best possible care.

Staff were passionate about enhancing people’s lives and promoting their well-being.

Staff treated people with dignity, respect and compassion.

People were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.



Updated 22 November 2016

The service was responsive.

Staff identified how people wished to be supported so that it was meaningful and personalised.

People were encouraged to pursue personal interests and hobbies and to join in activities.

People were listened to and staff supported them if they had any concerns or were unhappy



Updated 22 November 2016

The service was well led.

The vision and values of the home were embedded in the way care and support was provided to people. Feedback was encouraged and improvements made to the service when needed.

People benefitted from staff who felt supported and were motivated to learn and develop. There was a person centred culture and a commitment to providing high quality care and support.

The managers strove to maintain, sustain and further improve the experiences of people living in the home through quality assurance processes.