Mulberry Court

Updated 21 August 2021

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by three inspectors and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Mulberry 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.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 19 people who used the service and five relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 15 members of staff including the area manager, registered manager, deputy manager, care team leaders, care workers, wellbeing leads, domestic staff and the chef. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We spoke with three visiting professionals who came to the service.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We spoke with seven more relatives on the telephone.

Updated 21 August 2021

About the service

Mulberry Court is a residential care home providing personal care to 82 younger and older adults at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 84 people. The service supports people who may be living with dementia, a physical disability or a sensory impairment.

Mulberry Court has three floors that have been adapted to support people living with dementia. People have their own rooms with en-suite facilities and have access to shared communal areas such as lounges, dining rooms, bathrooms and a garden.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People and their relatives were positive about the support from management and staff team. One person told us, ‘‘It is lovely here. [Staff] treat me well, they know what I like, and I could not be living in a better place.’’

People were kept safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding, knew how to identify signs that abuse may be happening and how to report this. Risks to people had been assessed and measures were put in place to mitigate these risks as far as possible. There were enough suitably trained staff to meet people’s needs. People were supported safely with their medicines. The service was kept clean and good infection control processes, including those related to COVID-19 were in place and followed. The management team analysed accidents and incidents and shared any lessons that could be learned with the staff team.

People were supported by a kind, caring and compassionate staff team who knew them as individuals. People were clearly happy and relaxed being supported by the staff team. Staff supported people to make choices about their care. 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 promoted people to live independently and respected their privacy and dignity.

Staff supported people in a person-centred manner depending on people’s preferences, likes and dislikes. Care plans were written in a way which focused staff on these areas. People were supported to communicate in a way that made sense to them. Staff ensured that people engaged in social events and pastimes which matched their interests. There was a complaints procedure in place and people and their relatives knew how to raise concerns. People received dignified and respectful care at the end of their lives.

The registered manager and management team promoted a positive and inclusive culture at the service. They were open and honest about the improvements made at the service and those that still needed to be focused on. Audits were completed to monitor the quality of the service and actions were taken if areas for improvement were found. People, relatives and the staff team told us they were asked to feed back about the service and that their suggestions were considered and taken on board. The staff team linked and worked with external professionals and organisations to support good outcomes for people.

The registered manager was passionate about the improvement that had been made at the service and the improvements that they had planned to make happen going forward. The service had consistently been improving since the registered manager was employed and these improvements were evident at this inspection. People and relatives’ comments reflected a service that had improved and provided a safe, effective and good quality service.

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 requires improvement (report published 30 August 2019). We also completed a targeted inspection which did not lead to a rating change (report published 31 March 2021)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

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.