You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 4 October 2018

Augusta Court is a residential ‘care home’ that provides personal care for up to 46 people and on the day of inspection there were 46 people living at the 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 was one adapted building with private bedrooms and shared communal areas. Some people living at the home were living with dementia, frailty or physical disabilities.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People remained safe. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and there were systems and processes in place to keep people safe. A relative told us “The staff are very good; the security is very good. Anything wrong and I have a word with the manager.” The management of medicines continued to be safe. The registered manager had put measures in place to continue to improve medicines management at the home.

People's needs were assessed, before they moved into the home and regularly thereafter. One relative told us, “They discuss everything with me. They go through every aspect of her care. We have regular meetings…They seem to look at every aspect of her care and there’s a lot of things to consider.” People had access to a balanced diet and healthcare professionals as required. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People were treated with kindness and respect. We observed positive interactions between people and staff. Staff knew people well and had built trusting relationships. One person told us “The staff are exceptional. They’re first rate.”

Peoples independence continued to be promoted. People were encouraged to make their own decisions, where appropriate, and supported to be independent. People's privacy was respected. Staff were conscientious always knocked before entering people’s rooms.

Staff continued to be responsive and care was personalised to meet people’s needs. Staff were very knowledgeable about people's care and how they wished it to be provided. People and their relatives, where appropriate, were involved in reviews of their care. One person told us “I write my own care plan.” Complaints continued to be responded to in a timely manner and the provider ensured there were systems in place to deal with these appropriately. A person told us “You get immediate care, I’ve got no complaints.”

The home continued to be well-led. All of the people and relatives we spoke with told us they thought the home was well managed. Staff, people and relatives were very complimentary of the manager. Staff said they felt supported within their roles. Quality assurance systems remained effective. There were processes in place to assess, monitor and drive improvements in the quality of care people received.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 4 October 2018

The home remained good.

Effective

Good

Updated 4 October 2018

The home remained good.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 October 2018

The home remained good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 4 October 2018

The home remained good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 4 October 2018

The home remained good.