Archived: Acacia Court

People’s experience of using this service: People and their relatives gave positive feedback about the care they received, and their experience of the service. Staff showed genuine dedication to deliver care in a person-centred way, based on people's preferences.

The provider ensured robust recruitment procedures were in place and followed. Staff had received appropriate training and support to enable them to carry out their roles effectively and safely. Staff received supervision and appraisal of their work performance. There were enough staff to meet people's needs and people's rights, privacy and dignity were maintained at all times.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff had completed training in how to safeguard people and risk assessments were completed to identify potential hazards. Lessons were learnt about accidents and incidents and these were shared with staff, to reduce the risk of further occurrences.

Medicines were managed safely. People were supported and encouraged to manage their medication independently.

Care plans described the support people needed. These included information and guidance from external healthcare professionals. People's dietary needs and preferences were met. People were positive about the food at the service.

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.

Complaints were managed in line with the provider's policy. People and their relatives were provided with information on how to complain.

People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive improvement. Effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided through a range of internal checks and audits. The registered manager was aware of their responsibility to report events that occurred within the service to the CQC and external agencies.

Rating at last inspection: The service was last rated Good (published 10 August 2016). For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our inspection schedule for those services rated Good. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

Acacia Court is located in the centre of Pudsey, close to local services, bus routes and within walking distance of Pudsey town centre. Acacia Court provides care and accommodation for 41 older people. Bedrooms are on three floors and all have en suite facilities, there are also specialist bathing and shower facilities. There are private gardens and patio areas for people to enjoy.

At the time of this inspection 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.

There was opportunity for people to be involved in some activities within the home or the local community. However, we have made a recommendation about people’s individual wishes and reviewing of the activity programme.

During our inspection we saw people were treated with kindness and patience. People’s care plans contained sufficient and relevant information to provide consistent, care and support. However, some staff told us they did not get time to read them. Staff knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

People’s medicines were handled and managed well by staff. However, we were told by some staff they had been asked to give people their medicines without been observed and the MAR was then signed by the senior staff member. This was been investigated by the registered manager.

People who used the service told us they felt safe. We found there were appropriate systems in place to protect people from risk of harm. Individual risks had been assessed and identified as part of the support and care planning process.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of experienced staff. Robust recruitment procedures were in place and staff completed an induction when they started work. Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and training was available.

Staff had received training in Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We saw further training had been arranged for October 2016. Staff supported people to make day to day decisions about their care and support.

We found people had access to healthcare services to make sure their health needs were met. A new menu had recently been introduced which was more nutritionally balanced and offered variety. People were getting used to the new menu and in the process of providing feedback to the registered manager.

Complaints were responded to appropriately and people were given information on how to make a complaint. Most staff said the registered manager was approachable and listened to them. People had opportunity to comment on the quality of service and influence service delivery. Effective systems were in place which ensured people received safe quality care.

We found people who used the service were involved in making decisions about their care needs. Where people were unable to make an informed decision, family members and other professionals were involved in reviews and best interest meetings to ensure people were cared for in the most appropriate way.

We saw from speaking with staff members and looking at staff files there was a recruitment process and appropriate checks were in place in order to safeguard those using the service.

We looked at four peoples medication records and the medication storage room as well as speaking to two of the staff that administer medication. This demonstrated to us that medication was appropriately stored and staff followed the correct procedures when they gave people their medicines.

We looked at the complaints procedure and spoke with family members about making a complaint. We saw evidence that complaints were followed through and outcomes were fed back to the complainants. One family member said, "They listened and acted on what I said quickly."