You are here

Time Court Residential and Nursing Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 August 2019

About the service

Time Court Residential and Nursing Home is a care home providing personal and nursing care to 50 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 56 people.

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

People’s care, treatment and support promoted a good quality of life. Assessments had taken account of people choices. People were supported to access the healthcare services they needed. There were arrangements to ensure that people’s nutritional needs were met. People’s dietary requirements, likes and dislikes were assessed and known to staff. However, the environment was not fully adapted to meet the specific needs of people with dementia. We have made a recommendation for the service to seek advice regarding this. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. When people were unable to make decisions about their care and support, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were followed.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff understood different types of abuse, which meant they could spot the signs of abuse and report accurately to relevant authorities. There were also effective systems and processes in place to minimise risks to people. Each person's care plan had several risk assessments and measures to reduce risk. People told us they received their medicines on time and as prescribed.

People were supported and treated with dignity and respect. They were involved as partners in their care. People and their relatives confirmed that staff were kind and caring. They were supported to maintain their independence. Their care records contained information about their choices and independence. People’s care plans recorded and addressed their specific needs in relation to equality and diversity issues. However, we found the food menu did not fully cater for different cultures and cuisines. There was evidence the service was working to address this.

The service planned personalised care that met people’s needs, preferences and interests. People’s records set out their preferences and addressed their individual nutritional needs and risks. There was a programme of activities organised by the service. People attended a variety of activities, which they enjoyed. However, people told us outdoor activities were limited. The service was working to improve opportunities for outdoor activities. Each person’s preferred method of communication was highlighted in their care plans, which showed people’s communication needs had been considered.

Methods of monitoring the quality of the service were in place. There was an ongoing effort to improve the service. Regular checks and audits had been carried out in areas related to maintenance of the premises, health and safety, medicines management, infection control and management of accidents and incidents.

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 Good (published 25 November 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 August 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 2 August 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 August 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 August 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 August 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.