You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 April 2020

About the service

Cedar Court is a care home for people with learning disabilities and/or autism. The service was providing personal care to 12 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 13 people. The ages of people living at the service ranged from 19 to 53 years old.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. The provider had re-designed the layout of the service to ensure it complies. The property which comprised of two semi-detached houses were being run as two separate units. The next part of the development was to add an additional kitchen. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Cedar Court placed people at the heart of the service. People benefited from staff and management who were passionate about supporting them to live their best possible life. Staff knew people really well and understood and respected how they wished to be supported. People told us they enjoyed living at the service and we saw many examples where the actions of the service had resulted in an improved quality of life for people. Relatives told us, “I can’t imagine any service could do better” and “I find they are very helpful and supportive in seeing that he has the best care possible.”

Each person was seen as an individual by staff, who knew their wishes and aspirations. Staff worked with people to put together a very detailed care plan and achieved their desired outcomes. Together, they identified suitable activities, education and work. Staff were highly responsive in identifying people's needs and ensured they were supported in the best way possible.

People benefited from compassionate support provided by a kind, committed and caring staff team. People told us, "They’re good people, they look after me” and “I'm very happy.” We observed one person say to staff, “I love you guys.” People were treated equally and with respect. Staff recognised the importance of family and friends and helped people maintain these important contacts.

People's risks were understood and managed well. People were protected from discrimination and abuse because staff understood how to safeguard them. Staff had the skills and knowledge to support people safely and effectively. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to external healthcare support. Where necessary, staff supported people to attend medical and hospital appointments to ensure they felt comfortable with what was happening.

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.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and ach

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 April 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 April 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 April 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 April 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Outstanding

Updated 2 April 2020

The service was exceptionally well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.