You are here

Archived: Gable Court Care Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 8 October 2015

This inspection took place on 09 September 2015 and was unannounced. At the last inspection on 15 January 2015 we saw care plans had not been reviewed monthly as outlined in the services record keeping policy and there was gap in the recording of care. After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breach.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Gable Court Nursing Home on our website at

Gable Court Nursing Home provides personal care, including nursing care for up to 51 people in a purpose built building located in a residential area. The service is arranged over three floors and there are garden and patio areas. Most people’s rooms have an attached private bathroom.

The service does not have a registered manager in place. 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. The previous registered manager was no longer working for the service.

At this inspection we found the provider had taken sufficient action to ensure people were protected from the risks of unsafe care and support as we found care records had been reviewed and updated regularly to reflect the needs of people.

Inspection areas



Updated 13 April 2015

The service was safe. People using the service told us they felt safe. People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff had appropriate training and guidance had been followed.

Records were in place to monitor any specific areas where people were more at risk and explained what action staff needed to take to protect them. Emergency plans were in place to protect people from risks associated with foreseeable adverse events.

We saw robust background checks had been carried out on staff before they started to work at the home to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. People were supported by staff teams to help give continuity of care.

There were systems in place to make sure people received their medications safely.



Updated 13 April 2015

The service was effective. Care and support was delivered in a safe way by staff who had received appropriate training. Staff received appropriate support to meet the needs of people living at the home.

Care records demonstrated that when there had been changes in people’s needs outside agencies had been involved to make sure they received the correct care and support.

The service had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards to guide and inform the staff. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) aim to make sure that people in care homes are looked after in a way that does not inappropriately restrict their freedom.

People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink that they enjoyed.



Updated 13 April 2015

The service was caring. People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff, and staff were given support and guidance to ensure that they cared for people safely.

People spoke positively about their experience of receiving care at the home.

Staff acted on people's needs and in accordance with their wishes. Where people needed specific support or care, we saw evidence that this was delivered in accordance with people's needs.

People were involved in decisions relating to the care they received.

People’s privacy and dignity was being respected by staff and where possible staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible.


Requires improvement

Updated 8 October 2015

The service was responsive. People received care that was responsive to their needs by thorough assessment and reviews of care plans, involving people or their relatives.



Updated 13 April 2015

The service was well-led. People using the service and staff were actively encouraged to speak to the manager should they have any concerns.

There was a quality assurance system in place, where staff internal and external to the service carried out a quality monitoring programme. This was detailed, frequent and thorough.

Staff we spoke with believed they were well led and had confidence in the management team.