This unannounced inspection of Thomas Henshaw Court care home took place on 31 March 2016.
Thomas Henshaw Court is a purpose built care home located in its own grounds in a residential area of Southport. It can provide accommodation for up to 44 people in self-contained flats, each of which has an en-suite bathroom and a kitchenette. There is wheelchair access throughout the building. The home is located close to local shops and is near to bus links for access to Southport town centre and surrounding areas.
There were 39 people living at the home when we carried out the inspection.
A registered manager was 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.
People said they felt safe living at the home and were supported in a safe way by staff.
The staff we spoke with could clearly describe how they would recognise abuse and the action they would take to ensure actual or potential abuse was reported. Staff confirmed they had received adult safeguarding training. An adult safeguarding policy was in place for the home and the local area safeguarding procedure was also available for staff to access.
Staff told us they were well supported through the induction process, regular supervision and appraisal. The deputy manager advised us that staff supervision was not up-to-date due to changes in staffing but said they were working to rectify this. Staff said they were up-to-date with the training they were required by the organisation to undertake for the job and training records confirmed this.
Staff had been appropriately recruited to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. People living at the home and staff told us there was sufficient numbers of staff on duty at all times.
A range of risk assessments had been completed depending on people’s individual needs. Care plans were well completed and they reflected people’s current needs, in particular people’s physical health care needs. Risk assessments and care plans were reviewed on a monthly basis or more frequently if needed.
Safeguards were in place to ensure medicines were managed in a safe way. Medicines were administered individually from the medication trolley to people living at the home. Checks and audits were in place to monitor that medicines were managed in accordance with the home’s policy and national guidance.
The building was clean, well-lit and clutter free. Measures were in place to monitor the safety of the environment and equipment. A refurbishment programme was in place to up-grade the bathrooms in each of the flats.
People’s individual needs and preferences were respected by staff. They were supported to maintain optimum health and could access a range of external health care professionals when they needed to. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and their preferred routines. We observed positive and warm engagement between people living at the home and staff throughout the inspection. A full and varied programme of recreational activities was available for people to participate in.
People told us they were satisfied with the meals. We observed that people had plenty of encouragement and support at meal times if they needed it. People living at the home and their families were invited to three monthly meetings to review the menus.
Staff sought people’s consent before providing support or care. The home adhered to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Applications to deprive people of their liberty under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) had been submitted to the Local Authority.
People described management and staff as caring, respectful and approachable. People said the service was well managed and they said their views were sought about how to develop the service.
The culture within the service was and open and transparent. Staff and people living there said the management was both approachable and supportive. They felt listened to and involved in the running of the home.
Staff were aware of the whistle blowing policy and said they would not hesitate to use it. Opportunities were in place to address lessons learnt from the outcome of incidents, complaints and other investigations.
A procedure was established for managing complaints and people living at the home were aware of what to do should they have a concern or complaint.
A wide-range of comprehensive audits or checks were in place to monitor the quality and safety of care provided. These were used to identify developments for the service.