Archived: Netherfield Court

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, speaking with the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

The provider had appropriate arrangements in place to ensure the risks of infection or poor hygiene were managed. The provider had acted quickly to address shortfalls identified in our last inspection in relation to infection control procedures.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, speaking with the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Staff were given guidance to ensure that they cared for people safely, and detailed risk assessments and records were in place to ensure people received the care and support they required. The provider did not have appropriate arrangements in place to ensure the risks of infection or poor hygiene were managed.

Is the service effective?

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

Care plans contained assessments of people's care and support needs. These assessments described the steps staff should take to ensure each person's needs were met. Evidence we checked showed that staff were following people's care plans and risk assessments.

Is the service caring?

People we spoke with praised the service. One said: 'It's tip top, I couldn't have wished for better.' We observed that staff interacted warmly and considerately with people, and took time to meet people's needs.

Is the service responsive?

Where the provider identified areas for improvement, these were implemented. Where people's needs changed, the way they were cared for was changed to meet their needs, and external healthcare professionals were consulted.

Is the service well-led?

There was a quality assurance system in place, where audits of all aspects of the service were carried out. Where action was required we saw it was implemented.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Staff had a good knowledge of the needs of people who used the service.

We saw that staff treated people with dignity and kindness. We observed that a friendly and positive approach was used, to ensure that the wishes and needs of people using the service were respected.

We spoke with two relatives who confirmed they were satisfied with the care provided at the home. One relative said, 'This was the right place for my relative, we know the intense physiotherapy will help to get my relative back home.'

People were cared for by staff, who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. Staff said the team worked together to ensure people could return home safely and rehabilitated.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because their records had been reviewed and updated regularly. Complaints were investigated and responded to in a timely manner.

People's personal records were accurate and fit for purpose. Care plans and needs assessments were detailed. We saw that people's records were up to date and regularly reviewed so that they remained current and reflected people's care and support needs

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. People had recorded their consent to their care plans and risk assessments

Care took place in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained.

Appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work and there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

People's care records were not always accurate or fit for purpose, and at times were not securely stored.