Pennington Court

Pennington Court is a residential care home providing care and support for up to eight people with a learning disability, acquired brain injury and other associated conditions. At the time of the inspection the service was full.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

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

People were positive about their experience of living at Pennington Court. There were enough staff to keep people safe. We observed when people required assistance staff were quickly available, and where people had been assessed as needing one to one support it was provided.

We identified some concerns relating to how people's dignity was upheld. The registered manager told us this was already being addressed but the evidence they provided to support this was not sufficient to reassure.

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 had a good knowledge of people using the service, their preferences and hopes for the future. People spoke positively about the staff.

People’s medicines were managed safely. There were good systems in place to monitor the management of people’s medicines and staff had received appropriate training in this area.

People’s dietary needs and preferences were catered for. The service worked with other professionals to ensure people’s health care needs were addressed.

People’s needs were assessed, and their care plans included information about their needs and preferences. This supported the delivery of person-centred care.

People were supported to take part in a range of appropriate activities inside and outside the home.

Management systems within the service did not always identify shortfalls in delivery.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

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 9 June 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

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.

At the last inspection in May 2015, the service was rated overall good with one domain rated as requires improvement. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The home had a registered manager. 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.

Some people we spoke with had limited verbal communication. However, they very clearly indicated they felt safe and were happy living in the home, liked the staff and did the activities they liked to do.

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.

Medication procedures were in place including protocols for the use of ‘as and when required’ (PRN) medications. Staff had received training in medication management and medication was audited in line with the provider’s procedures. There was good guidance for staff regarding how people expressed pain or discomfort, so they could respond appropriately and seek input from health care professionals, if necessary. People had access to a good range of health care services and staff actively advocated for people if they felt health care services were not as responsive as they should be.

Staff we spoke with had a clear understanding of safeguarding people and they were confident their managers and the rest of their team would act appropriately to safeguard people from abuse.

The support plans we looked at included risk assessments, which identified any risks, associated with people’s care and had been devised to help minimise and monitor the risks without placing undue restrictions on people.

There were enough staff to keep people safe and to meet people’s individual needs, and the staff told us they received good training and support. Staff retention was good, and staff knew people well and had built good relationships. There was also a good mix of staff in relation to such things as gender and ethnicity.

People were encouraged to make decisions about meals, and were supported to go shopping and be involved in menu planning. We saw people were involved and consulted about all aspects of their care and support, where they were able, including suggestions for activities and holidays.

Staff spoke with people in a caring and positive way, treated people with respect and were mindful of their rights and dignity. There was a nice, relaxed atmosphere and people were relaxed and smiling in the staff’s presence.

The complaints process was clear and people’s comments and complaints were taken very seriously, investigated and responded to in a timely way. People didn’t have any complaints to tell us about and indicated they were happy living at the service. Relatives we spoke with raised no concerns about the care provided at the service.

The registered manager was person centred in his approach. Person centred care is when staff understand what is important to the person and give them the right care and support to do the things they want. The staff we met were very enthusiastic and professional, and were good communicators. They told us they were well supported by the management team. It was clear from staff’s responses to question that they had a clear understanding of the ethos of the home and they knew people’s support needs very well.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by a representative of the registered provider. The reports included any actions required and these were checked each month to determine progress.

Further information is in the detailed findings below