We carried out a review of the data available to us about Moordale Court on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Moordale Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Moordale Court is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 3 people with a learning disability. At the time of inspection 3 people were living at the home, which is based in one adapted building.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
Right Support: People received the right support with their medicines. Staff focused on people’s strengths and promoted what they could do, so they had fulfilling and meaningful lives. Staff supported people to take part in activities and pursue their interests in their local area, which they were doing during our inspection. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Right Care: People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people’s privacy and dignity. They understood and responded to their individual needs. Staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. The service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it. The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. People received care that supported their needs and aspirations, was focused on their quality of life, and followed best practice.
Right Culture: People led inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff. People received good quality care, support and treatment because trained staff and specialists could meet their needs and wishes. Staff knew and understood people well and were responsive, supporting their aspirations to live a quality life of their choosing. Staff turnover was very low, which supported people to receive consistent care from staff who knew them well. Staff placed people’s wishes, needs and rights at the heart of everything they did. People and those important to them, including advocates, were involved in planning their care.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 9 February 2018).
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Moordale Court was last inspected by CQC on 15, 16 and 19 October 2015 and was rated ‘good’ overall and in all areas. At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall and in all areas.
Moordale Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Moordale Court provides personal care for up to three people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were three people living at the home. Moordale is located in a village called Lingdale near Saltburn. The home is situated within walking distance to the local high street and shops.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
The atmosphere of the home was very homely, warm and welcoming. People who used the service were relaxed in their own home environment.
People were supported to have choice and control over their own lives from being supported by person centred approaches. Person centred care is when the person is central to their support and their preferences are respected.
People were supported to forward plan and were also supported to achieve personal goals in their lives.
People were always respected by staff and treated with kindness. We saw staff being respectful, considerate and communicating exceptionally well with people who don’t use words to communicate.
People’s support plans were person centred. They included outcomes that people wanted to achieve and a ‘one page profile’ that referenced people’s personal histories and described their individual support needs. These were regularly reviewed.
People were supported to play an active role within their local community by making regular use of local resources including the local shops and local activities.
Support plans contained person centred risk assessments. These identified risks and described the measures and interventions to be taken to ensure people were protected from the risk of harm. This supported people do the things they wanted to live their lives fully. The support plans we viewed also showed us that people’s health was monitored and referrals were made to other health support professionals where necessary, for example their GP or epilepsy nurse.
Staff understood safeguarding issues and procedures were in place to minimise the risk of abuse occurring. Where concerns had been raised we saw they had been referred to the relevant safeguarding department for investigation. Robust recruitment processes were in place.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions about aspects of their care, staff were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act to make decisions in the person’s best interest. For those people that did not always have capacity, mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been completed for them. Records of best interest decisions showed involvement from people’s family and staff.
We saw people were encouraged to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. The service was truly reflective of what people liked and people were in control of this and chose what they would like to eat.
People had their rights respected and access to advocacy services was available.
People were supported to maintain their independence on a daily basis.
Support staff told us they felt supported to carry out their role and to develop further and that the registered manager led by example. They were supportive and always approachable.
When we looked at the staff training records, they showed us staff were supported and able to maintain and develop their skills through training. Development opportunities were accessible available? at this service. People were supported by enough staff to meet their needs and were also supported individually with one to one support.
Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely. We looked at how records were kept and spoke with the registered manager about how senior staff were trained to administer medicines and how this was monitored.
We found an effective quality assurance survey took place regularly and we looked at the results. The service delivered had been regularly reviewed through a range of internal audits.
We found people who used the service and their representatives were regularly asked for their views about the support and service they received.
We inspected Moordale Court on 15, 16 and 19 October 2015. This was an unannounced inspection which meant that the staff and provider did not know that we would be visiting.
Moordale Court is a three bedded care home providing personal care to people with a learning disability. It is a purpose built house situated close to local shops and amenities.
The home had a registered manager in place and they have run the home for over 20 years. 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.
At the time of the inspection three people lived at the home and we met all of the people who used the service. Two of the people who used the service were unable communicate verbally and the other person did not like meeting strangers but they did tell us that they liked the staff and the home met all of their needs. We observed staff practices and saw that the people were treated with compassion and respect. We saw that people were very comfortable with each other and staff presence and there was lots of laughter.
We saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. We found that staff understood and appropriately used safeguarding procedures.
We saw that staff were aware of how to respect people’s privacy and dignity. We saw that staff supported people to make choices and decisions.
We saw that people were offered plenty to eat and assisted to select healthy food and drinks which helped to ensure that their nutritional needs were met. We saw that each individual’s preference was catered for and people were supported to manage their weight..
We saw that detailed assessments were completed, which identified people’s health and support needs as well as any risks to people who used the service and others. These assessments were used to create plans to reduce the risks identified as well as support plans.
People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services. People were supported and encouraged to have regular health checks and were accompanied by staff to hospital appointments. We saw that people had hospital passports. The aim of a hospital passport is to assist people with a learning disability to provide hospital staff with important information they need to know about them and their health when they are admitted to hospital.
Staff had received a range of training, which covered mandatory courses such as fire safety, infection control and first aid as well as condition specific training such as working with people who have learning disabilities. Staff had also received training around the application of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The staff we spoke with fully understood the requirements of this Act and were ensuring that where appropriate this legislation was used.
Staff shared with us a range of information about how they as a team worked very closely with people to make sure the service enabled each person to reach their potential.
People and the staff we spoke with told us that there were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs and we observed that were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs. We saw that two staff were on duty when people were at home and one person was on duty overnight. We found that the registered manager was on duty during the weekdays.
Effective recruitment and selection procedures were in place and we saw that appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. The checks included obtaining references from previous employers to show staff employed were safe to work with vulnerable people.
We reviewed the systems for the management of medicines and found that people received their medicines safely.
We saw that the registered provider had a system in place for dealing with people’s concerns and complaints. We saw that there was an accessible complaints policy and relatives were regularly contacted and knew how to complain. We found that relatives felt confident that staff would respond and take action to support them.
We found that the building was very clean and well-maintained. Appropriate checks of the building and maintenance systems were undertaken to ensure health and safety. We found that all relevant infection control procedures were followed by the staff at the home.
The registered provider had developed a range of systems to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw that the registered manager had implemented these and used them to critically review the service
We looked at a range of records, spoke with the manager and three staff. We observed the interactions between staff and people living at Moordale Court and engaged with people who used the service. We also spoke with the relatives of one person who lives at Moordale Court.
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection and from speaking with manager and staff. Also from our observation of how staff supporting people lived at Moordale Court.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
We saw that there were systems in place to keep people safe. People were provided with appropriate levels of staffing and observation to keep them safe.
There were effective systems in place for the ongoing maintenance and servicing of equipment. There were also good systems in place in respect of fire safety and fire training. We saw that Moordale Court was well maintained, clean and homely.
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The manager had received training in regard to this and understood the action that needed to be taken should the need arise. Staff had also completed safeguarding of vulnerable adults training which incorporated information about the Mental Capacity Act.
Is it effective?
People all had their needs assessed and had individual care, which set out their care needs. We observed how aspects of care detailed within people's care plan were delivered by staff. It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of the people's care and support needs and that they knew them well.
Staff knew how and when to involve other health and social care professionals. We saw lots of evidence contained within people's care records
Is it caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that staff engaged with people in a positive way and showed respect, kindness and gave people gentle encouragement. We saw them involving people in individual activities and give encouragement and praise.
People's needs had been assessed and care plans put in place which detailed people's needs and preferences. These records provided comprehensive information to staff on what care and support people who lived at Moordale Court needed.
People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded in their care records. Care and support had been provided in accordance with people's needs.
Is it responsive?
There was clear evidence contained within people's care plans to show how they worked with other health and social care professionals. We saw lots of evidence of multi-agency working and also of annual health checks.
It is well led?
The service worked well with other agencies and services, to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.
The home had a registered manager. There were systems in place to assure the quality of the service they provided. The way the service was run was regularly reviewed, although this was not always formally recorded.
Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and were knowledgeable about people's needs. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.
What people told us.
During this inspection we were unable to engage people in any detailed verbal communication. We did however carry out some observations while people were in the service. We saw that staff treated people with dignity and respect. We saw that there was a real sense of well-being, with lots of smiles, singing and positive non-verbal communication. One person we spoke with indicated they were settled and happy in the home and told us about the music they liked to listen to.
One relative we spoke with said, 'They are well cared for, we are kept well informed and have a good rapport with the staff.'
We saw that staff had a good understanding of people's non-verbal cues and were very quick to respond to them.
Staff told us about the various activities available. These included attendance at a local day centre, going out for walks and outings. Staff said, 'We provide person centred care, there is a loose routine but it is flexible, based around individual needs.'
We also saw within the home that people accessed activities suitable for them. Their individual bedrooms were well personalised. One person was engaged in arts and crafts, while another was using musical instruments.