We carried out a review of the data available to us about Ammersall 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 Ammersall Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Ammersall Court is a care home registered with CQC to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 18 people. It is situated in Scawthorpe, Doncaster. The service is provided by Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council and provides care for people with physical disabilities and/or learning disabilities. The home comprises four, linked bungalows, each with their own front door. People who use the service can move freely between the bungalows to meet and socialise with friends and neighbours. There were eighteen people using the service at the time of our inspection.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they were exceptionally happy with the care and support they received at Ammersall Court. Comments from people, their relatives and other professionals were, without exception, positive.
People's needs, and wishes were fully met by staff that knew them well and were passionate about people’s independence. People were respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service. Typical of people’s comments were, “This is the best place I’ve ever lived” and “I love living here.”
People received exceptionally personalised care and support specific to their needs and preferences. This had been particularly effective in supporting people to achieve their goals and aspirations and encouraged more freedom for people to take risks. This in turn, had led to people becoming more confident and adventurous and having very rich lives.
People were assisted to learn to be involved in managing their medicines and received their medicines in a safe way. Staff were patiently committed to enabling people to do as much for themselves as possible. Staff were very knowledgeable about how to keep people safe and the service learned from accidents and incidents and used this learning to improve the service. Recruitment continued to be undertaken in a safe way and there were enough staff to meet the needs of each person.
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. Staff were skilled, motivated and knowledgeable. They had received appropriate training and support and were encouraged to develop their individual skills and interests. People received a balanced diet which met their individual needs and took into consideration their preferences.
People were supported by staff who were incredibly kind and caring and who maintained their dignity and privacy and treated them with utmost respect. People were fully involved in the service and had opportunities to give feedback.
The service was exceptionally well-led. The registered manager’s dedication to a person led approach to supporting people provided a positive model for all the staff. The registered manager and their staff team were passionate and committed in placing people at the heart of the service.
Feedback about the registered manager was exceptionally positive and staff felt very well supported. Staff were well motivated and very proud of the service, and morale was very high. There had been several improvements made since the last inspection and these built on an already well led and well monitored service, to ensure there was an extremely strong person centred, person led, caring and responsive ethos. People consistently told us how they were treated with exceptional kindness and respect. We saw there was an extremely positive atmosphere and engaging interaction during our visit.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published December 2016).
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Ammersall Court’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk’
Ammersall Court is a care home situated in Scawthorpe, Doncaster which is registered to accommodate up to 18 people. The service is provided by Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council and provides care for people with physical and/or learning disabilities. The home was split into four bungalows each with their own front doors. People who used the service could move freely between the bungalows to meet and socialise with friends and neighbours.
The service had a registered manager. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Infection control procedures had improved since our last inspection of the service. South Yorkshire Housing who were the owners of the building had refurbished the kitchenettes and utility rooms which had made significant improvements to the areas.
Potential risks to people's health, safety and welfare had been reduced because there were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how to support people safely. There were systems in place to safeguard people from avoidable harm and staff had been trained in safeguarding procedures.
The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient staff to support people safely. People's medicines were managed safely.
Staff had regular supervision and they had been trained to meet people's individual needs. They understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people's consent prior to care and support being provided.
People were supported by staff who were kind, caring, friendly and respectful. They were supported to make choices about how they lived their lives and how they wanted to be supported. People had enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. They were supported to access other health services when required.
People had access to a wide range of activities that were provided both in-house and in the community. One person told us they liked going to the Crucible theatre, another liked to watch Doncaster Rovers while others liked to attend adult social centres during the week.
The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were in place to protect people who may not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) sets out what must be done to make sure that the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected, including balancing autonomy and protection in relation to consent or refusal of care or treatment.
The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people who used the service, their relatives, external professionals and staff, and they acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by a representative of the organisation. The reports included any actions required and these were checked each month to determine progress.
The inspection took place on 18 and 19 June 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in January 2014 the service was judged compliant with the regulations inspected.
Ammersall Court is a care home situated in Scawthorpe, Doncaster which is registered to take 18 people. The service is provided by Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council and provides care for people with physical and/or learning disabilities. The home was split into four bungalows each with their own front doors. People who used the service could move freely between the bungalows to meet and socialise with friends and neighbours.
The service has a registered manager, who has been in post for 12 months. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People we spoke with told us they felt safe while staying at the home. One person said, “I have lived here for a long time, staff help us to keep safe.” Staff had a clear understanding of potential abuse which helped them recognise abuse and how they would deal with situations if they arose.
There were enough skilled and experienced staff and there was a programme of training, supervision and appraisal to support staff to meet people’s needs. Procedures in relation to
recruitment and retention of staff were robust and ensured only suitable people were employed in the service.
The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were in place to protect people who may not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) sets out what must be done to make sure that the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected, including balancing autonomy and protection in relation to consent or refusal of care or treatment.
People were encouraged to make decisions about meals, and were supported to go shopping and be involved in menu planning. We saw people were involved and consulted about all aspects of their care and support, where they were able.
People had access to a wide range of activities that were provided both in-house and in the community. One person told us they liked going to the theatre while others liked to attend adult social centres during the week.
En-suite facilities in some bedrooms required improvements to ensure they were clean and hygienic. Kitchen facilities required improvements as they were not hygienic and fit for purpose. These improvements had been identified by the provider and had been discussed with the owners of the building which is South Yorkshire Housing Association. Plans were in place to address the shortfalls.
We observed good interactions between staff and people who used the service. People were happy to discuss the day’s events and one person told us that they had been into Doncaster to meet friends.
People told us they were aware of the complaints procedure and said staff would assist them if they needed to use it.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by a representative of the organisation. The reports included any actions required and these were checked each month to determine progress.
Two people who used the service and the relative of a person who used the service told us they were happy with the food and refreshments that were available. The people who used the service told us they were given a choice as to what food they wanted to eat. We saw evidence of people being given choices as to what they wished to eat. We found that a nutritious and balanced diet was made available.
Two people who used the service and the relative of a person who used the service told us they felt the home was clean. We found there were systems in place to manage and monitor the prevention and control of infection.
Two people who used the service and the relative of a person who used the service told us there were enough staff available to meet people's needs. We also spoke with a care worker who told us there were enough staff on duty. A review of staffing records showed there were sufficient staff to meet people's needs.
Two people who used the service and the relative of a person who used the service told us they knew how to make a complaint and who to complain to. We found there was a complaints procedure in place and staff were aware of their responsibility to report verbal complaints so they could be formally investigated.
People told us they were happy with the care they received. We reviewed care records which showed that risk assessments and formal reviews were undertaken to ensure care was effective and safe.
People who used the service told us they felt safe at the home. Care workers had undertaken training in safeguarding and were aware of their responsibility to report any abuse.
People told us they thought care workers were well trained and knew what they were doing. Care workers told us they had regular training, supervision and appraisal. We also reviewed training records which showed that staff had regular training in all appropriate areas.
People were asked for their opinion as to the quality of care in the home. We saw that regular meetings were held with people who used the service and staff. There were also systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service people received, and to manage any risks to people's health.
People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment. People's care plans and risk assessments were accurate and contained all appropriate information.
The people living in the bungalows and the visitors told us that in the last six months there had been several changes to the management structure and it had been 'hectic and uncertain' for everybody. But recently a new manager had been appointed and they were looking forward to some stability.
One relative made a suggestion to the manager about exploring the possibility of a large room or a conservatory at the site to have parties and meetings. They said at present they used public houses or function halls nearby and would welcome their own hall for gatherings.