You are here

Willow Court Nursing Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 September 2018

This inspection was unannounced and took place on the 9 and 10 July 2018.

Willow Court Nursing Home is a ‘care home’ and is registered to accommodate up to 66 people. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of the inspection, 63 people were accommodated at the home. Willow Court is situated in the grounds of Andover War Memorial Hospital.

There was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At our last inspection on 27, 28 and 29 September 2016, we found one breach of regulations. The service did not have an effective system in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service provided, or to take action where necessary to address and rectify any shortfalls. During this inspection, we found action had been taken and improvements made.

People felt safe living at Willow Court Nursing Home and they were very much at the heart of the service. Staff enjoyed working at the home and understood the needs of people using the service and supported people in a personalised way. Staff knew people well and we saw that care was provided respectfully and sensitively, taking into account people’s different needs.

Relevant recruitment checks were conducted before staff started working in the home to make sure they were of good character and had the necessary skills. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse. There were enough staff to keep people safe.

The risks to people were minimized through risk assessments. There were plans in place for foreseeable emergencies and fire safety checks were carried out.

People received varied meals including a choice of fresh food and drinks. Staff were aware of people’s likes and dislikes and went out of their way to provide people with what they wanted.

Staff received regular support and one to one sessions or supervision to discuss areas of development. They completed a wide range of training and felt it supported them in their job role. New staff completed an induction programme before being permitted to work unsupervised.

Staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and were clear that people had the right to make their own choices. Staff sought consent from people before providing care and support. The ability of people to make decisions was assessed in line with legal requirements to ensure their rights were protected and their liberty was not restricted unlawfully. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way; policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People were cared for with kindness, compassion and sensitivity. Care plans provided comprehensive information about how people wished to receive care and support. This helped ensure people received personalised care in a way that met their individual needs.

People were supported and encouraged to make choices and had access to a range of activities.

The registered manager maintained a high level of communication with people through a range of newsletters and meetings. ‘Residents meetings’ and surveys allowed people and their families to provide feedback which was used to improve the service. People felt listened to and a complaints procedure was in place.

There were appropriate management arrangements in place. Regular audits of the service were carried out to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 September 2018

The service had improved to good.

The service followed safe recruitment practices and there were sufficient staff to meet people�s needs.

People felt safe when receiving support from staff members. Staff received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse.

Staff were trained and assessed as competent to support people with medicines. Risk assessments were in place and fire safety checks were carried out.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 September 2018

The service had improved to good.

People were given a choice of nutritious food and drink and received appropriate support to meet their nutritional needs.

Staff received appropriate training and one to one supervisions. People were supported to access health professionals and treatments.

Staff sought consent from people before providing care and followed legislation designed to protect people�s rights.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 September 2018

The service remains caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 September 2018

The service had improved to good.

People received personalised care from staff that understood and were able to meet their needs. People had access to a range of activities which they could choose to attend.

People�s views were listened to. A complaints procedure was in place.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 September 2018

The service had improved to good.

People and relatives felt the service was well run.

Staff spoke highly of the management, who were approachable and supportive.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided.