Amber Court Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The management team and the nominated individual spoke about the changes they had made to improve the culture at the home. The manager told us, “We have made strategic improvements which weren't necessarily in place beforehand, this has underpinned everything we have done and driven the improvements.”

Staff shared positive feedback about the changes made at the home. One staff member told us, “There has been a big improvement…a lot of work has gone into staff training and meeting the needs of the residents. We are open to further improvements.”

The nominated individual shared how the management team had worked to improve the culture of the home. They told us this included supporting staff to take accountability when they saw concerns or gaps in people’s care. Audits and processes had been introduced which gave staff and the management team specific roles and responsibilities for identifying poor care or issues with the environment. Where concerns were identified, records showed timely action had been taken to improve people’s experiences of care.

The provider had leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively.

People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team. One person said, “I know who the manager is, I see her often, she always says hello and I feel I could talk to her. I think in general it is a happy atmosphere and I would recommend it to others.” Relatives shared positive feedback about how their family members had been treated since moving to the home. One relative commented, “[Person] has only been here 3 days, he looks so much better, he is clean, shaved and eating properly.”

Staff also shared positive feedback about the manager. One staff member said, “The managers are very supportive. I can always rely on them for advice and support.” The manager was actively involved in the day to day running of the home and was knowledgeable about people’s needs and knew people well. They had the skills and experience required to lead the home.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The provider had processes in place to support people, relatives and staff to raise concerns or share ideas. There was a whistleblowing policy which staff were aware of. One staff member told us, “There is a whistleblowing policy in place, I feel comfortable raising any concerns, including serious issues, and I know I will be listened to."

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff spoke positively about their experience of working at the home. One staff member said, “It’s not where I have worked before. This service is different, I am treated fairly and equally, with no discrimination.”

Staff had undertaken training in relation to equality and diversity, and staff’s understanding of people’s individual diverse needs was apparent when they spoke about the people they supported.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

People, staff and visiting professionals commented on the changes and improvements made at the home. One professional shared with us that they felt staff knew people better than previously and the communal areas were well staffed. None of the visiting professionals we spoke with expressed any concerns about the home.

The provider had established effective governance systems since our last inspection and these had driven improvement across the home and improved people’s experiences of care. The manager undertook a range of audits to monitor the quality of care provided and review the experiences of people living at the home. The findings were then used to create action plans, which detailed where changes or improvements were needed to improve quality and safety.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The management and staff team worked in partnership with local agencies to ensure people’s needs were met. Records showed they worked closely with professionals from health and social care services.Relatives were included as partners in people’s care. They told us they were involved in care planning and were kept updated when people’s care needs changed.

The provider focused on continuous learning, and improvement.

The management team had established processes which promoted a positive culture around learning and improvement. The management team shared how they had learned from previous inspections and now ensured they used information they gathered through checks and audits to learn and improve people’s care.

Systems, which included environmental checks, audits and feedback gathered from people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals were now all reviewed and information used to drive improvements across the home. The nominated individual told us, “We don’t want to become complacent. We are trying to improve culture, we review trends from incidents, care is more person centred and oversight has improved.”