You are here

Archived: Longton Court Good

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 September 2015

We carried out this unannounced inspection on the 5 and 7 August 2015. At our last inspection in November 2013 no concerns were identified.

Longton Court provides accommodation for up to seven people who could have a learning disability, autism and or mental health needs and who require personal and/or nursing care. At the time of our visit there were six people living at the home. Longton Court has three self-contained flats that have their own front door and three double bedrooms all with en-suites, a communal kitchen, lounge, dining room, medicines room, office, activities room, garden and patio area. There is also a self-contained ground floor flat and staff sleeping area.

There was a registered manager 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. The registered manager was present during the inspection.

There was not a safe system in place for the recruitment of new staff and some staff did start without appropriate checks being in place. Staffing levels were good and staff were skilled in communication with people, especially if people were unable to communicate verbally. Staff confirmed what a positive experience they had working for such a supportive provider. They all felt the culture of the home ensured they were kept informed of the situation through effective communication and support.

People were supported by staff who demonstrated a kind and caring approach. People received consistent support from staff who knew them well. People and relatives felt safe. The registered manager was ensuring people had their medicines administered by staff who had received training and were verified as being competent at administering medicines.

People, relatives and professionals we spoke with were happy with the care provided. People had support to access activities that were important to them and support plans and risk assessments were in place. People received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. Changes in people’s needs were quickly identified and their care package amended to meet their changing needs. There was enough staff to ensure people had access to community and their one to one support.

People and relatives were involved in planning medical treatments and felt there was good communication to ensure these ran smoothly. Health checks had been completed for some people living at the home, the registered manager was taking action to ensure all people had a completed health check. People who were unable to consent to care and treatment had completed assessments and best interest decision paperwork in place that involved significant others. Staff gave people choice and received training in the principles of The Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Annual surveys were sent to people, relatives and professionals about the quality of the service and there was a range of audits that monitored care and safety addressing shortfalls. A complaints policy with an easy read version was available for people and relatives. All people we spoke with felt happy to raise a complaint with the registered manager.

We found one breach of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 17 September 2015

The service did not always ensure people received safe care.

Staff recruitment was not robust and did not ensure people had support from staff who had received satisfactory checks prior to commencing employment.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and were skilled and experienced in providing and meeting their care needs. The service ensured there was enough staff for people to have their support and people felt happy with the support and care provided.

People had detailed risk assessments in place that identified triggers and concerns to ensure staff knew how to meet their needs in a safe way

The registered manager was ensuring people had their medicines administered by staff that had received training and were verified as being competent at administering medicines.

People felt safe and were supported by staff who had received training in recognising abuse. Staff had access to person alarms should they need to summon help.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 September 2015

The service was effective.

People’s health and social needs were met by staff who were informed through the assessments carried out and detailed care plans.

Staff received an in depth induction and training to prepare them for their role.

Regular meetings and handovers provided staff with support on top of regular supervision sessions.

Where people were unable to consent to care and treatment this was sought in line with legislation and appropriate paperwork was in place. Staff gave people choice and received training in the principles of The Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 September 2015

The service was caring.

People were happy about the care they received and care provided was responsive to people’s needs.

People had daily choices and preferences, and were involved in decisions about their care and support.

Staff worked in a kind and caring manner with people and demonstrated a kind and caring attitude. People had care provided in a dignified manner that met their needs.

People were treated with dignity and respect by staff. Support was provided to maintain relationships important to people.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 September 2015

The service was responsive.

People and those close to them were involved in care planning and reviewing their care.

People experienced a supportive settled transition into a service and had opportunity to build relationships prior to the change.

There was a complaints policy in place along with an easy read version all people we spoke with were happy to make a complaint should they need to.

People had choice with their activities and there was a activity room that people could use if they wished. All activities were personalised to people’s likes and interests.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 September 2015

The service was well-led.

Staff and the registered manager felt there was good communication and felt there was a positive culture within the organisation. All staff felt well supported.

There were effective quality assurance systems in place designed to monitor the quality of care provided.

There was a system in place to ensure people, relatives and professionals were sent an annual survey. The registered manager reviewed all comments for themes and trends.