You are here

Archived: April Court

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 25 September 2013

During a routine inspection

At the time of the inspection 18 people were living at April Court, one of whom was staying for respite. We talked with three people who used the service and observed how staff worked with people. One person told us “I like it here, I like making jewellery”. We spoke with a relative of one person, who said “A good thing about April Court is the friendliness.”

We spoke with the manager and deputy manager, three members of support staff, two agency support staff, the cook on duty, the cleaner and the person who was taking a session in jewellery making that day. One member of staff said “I like the atmosphere here. People are so well looked after.” Another staff member said “This is a great place. I believe we really make a difference.”

We reviewed care records for three people who used the service. Care and support were planned and delivered in such a way as to ensure the welfare and safety of people using the service and to meet their individual needs.

People were encouraged and supported to have adequate and varied food and drink. Individual needs were assessed where people were at risk of poor nutrition or had swallowing difficulties and appropriate action was taken.

We found that people were protected from the risk associated with unsafe management of medication because there were effective systems in place.

People using the service benefitted from a staff team who were well trained and supported to do their job.

Inspection carried out on 26 October 2012

During a routine inspection

During this unannounced inspection we used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. People had complex needs which meant they were not always able to tell us their experiences. Therefore, in addition to speaking with two individuals we gathered evidence by observing care; reviewing records and speaking to one relative, the registered and deputy manager and five care workers.

We noted throughout the inspection that care workers were polite, respectful, patient and sensitive. Care workers were able to discuss their awareness of dignity and rights and described how they maintained people’s privacy.

We found that people’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. Care plans were drawn up from detailed assessments, were person centred and regularly reviewed.

Care workers understood what constituted abuse and knew what to do if they suspected or knew a person living in the home was being mistreated.

Effective recruitment and selection processes were in place which ensured people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)