You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Doulton Court Care Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

.We inspected Doulton Court Care Home on 30 August 2016. This was an unannounced inspection. The service provides care and support for up to 41 people. When we undertook our inspection there were 39 people living at the home.

People living at the home were of mixed ages. Some people required more assistance either because of physical illnesses or because they were experiencing difficulties coping with everyday tasks, with some having loss of memory.

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.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. DoLS are in place to protect people where they do not have capacity to make decisions and where it is considered necessary to restrict their freedom in some way, usually to protect themselves. At the time of our inspection there were six people subject to such an authorisation.

We found that there were sufficient staff to meet the needs of people using the service. The provider had taken into consideration the complex needs of each person to ensure their needs could be met through a 24 hour period.

We found that people’s health care needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered in a consistent way through the use of a care plan. People were involved in the planning of their care and had agreed to the care provided. The information and guidance provided to staff in the care plans was clear. Risks associated with people’s care needs were assessed and plans put in place to minimise risk in order to keep people safe.

People were treated with kindness and respect. The staff in the home took time to speak with the people they were supporting. We saw many positive interactions and people enjoyed talking to the staff in the home. The staff on duty knew the people they were supporting and the choices they had made about their care and their lives. People were supported to maintain their independence and control over their lives.

Staff had taken care in finding out what people wanted from their lives and had supported them in their choices. They had used family and friends as guides to obtain information.

People had a choice of meals, snacks and drinks. Meals could be taken in a dining room, sitting rooms or people’s own bedrooms. Staff encouraged people to eat their meals and gave assistance to those that required it.

The provider used safe systems when new staff were recruited. All new staff completed training before working in the home. The staff were aware of their responsibilities to protect people from harm or abuse. They knew the action to take if they were concerned about the welfare of an individual.

People had been consulted about the development of the home and quality checks had been completed to ensure services met people’s requirements.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was safe.

Checks were made to ensure the home was a safe place to live.

Sufficient staff were on duty to meet people’s needs.

Staff in the home knew how to recognise and report abuse.

Medicines were stored and administered safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was effective.

Staff ensured people had enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing.

Staff received suitable training and support to enable them to do their job.

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and the key requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were understood by staff and people’s legal rights protected.

Caring

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was caring.

People were relaxed in the company of staff and told us staff were approachable.

People’s needs and wishes were respected by staff.

Staff ensured people’s dignity was maintained at all times.

Staff respected people’s needs to maintain as much independence as possible.

Responsive

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was responsive.

People’s care was planned and reviewed on a regular basis with them.

Activities were planned into each day and people told us how staff helped them spend their time.

People knew how to make concerns known and felt assured anything raised would be investigated.

Well-led

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was well-led.

Audits were undertaken to measure the delivery of care, treatment and support given to people against current guidance.

People’s opinions were sought on the services provided and they felt those opinions were valued when asked.

The views of visitors and other health and social care professionals were sought on a regular basis.