Thompson Court

Updated 13 November 2020

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.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service had been identified for use by the Local Authority as a designated care setting in response to the Winter Plan for people discharged from hospital with a positive Covid-19 status. This inspection was to ensure that the service was compliant with infection control and prevention measures.

This inspection took place on 20 October 2020 and was announced.

Updated 13 November 2020

This inspection took place on 12 October 2018 and was unannounced.

Thompson Court is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care home can accommodate up to 37 older people and older people living with dementia in one purpose built building, divided into four units. Accommodation is provided on one level. Thompson Court provides rehabilitation, assessment and emergency respite care although five people were receiving long term care. On the day of inspection there were 23 people receiving care and support and one of the units was closed for refurbishment.

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.

Staff were being recruited safely and there were enough staff to take care of people and to keep the home clean. Staff were receiving appropriate training and they told us the training was good and relevant to their role. Staff were supported by the registered manager and were receiving formal supervision where they could discuss their ongoing development needs.

People who used the service and their relatives told us staff were helpful, attentive and kind. We saw people were treated with respect and compassion.

Care plans were up to date and detailed what care and support people wanted and needed. Risk assessments were in place and showed what action had been taken to mitigate any risks which had been identified. People felt safe at the home and appropriate referrals were being made to the safeguarding team when this had been necessary.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People’s healthcare needs were being met and medicines were being stored and managed safely.

Staff knew about people’s dietary needs and preferences. People told us there was a reasonable choice of meals and said the food was generally good. The registered manager was working to improve food choice and appearance. There were plenty of drinks and snacks available for people in between meals.

Activities were on offer to keep people occupied both on a group and individual basis. Visitors were made to feel welcome.

The home was spacious, well decorated, clean and tidy. A programme of refurbishment was underway, planned with attention to people’s needs and reference to good practice guidelines.

The complaints procedure was displayed. Records showed complaints received had been dealt with appropriately.

People and staff praised the registered manager and said they were approachable and supportive. The provider had effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care provided and where issues were identified they took action to make improvements.

We found all the fundamental standards were being met. Further information is in the detailed findings below.