We carried out a review of the data available to us about Marling Court on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Marling Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Marling Court is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 37 people. The service provides support to older people and those with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 35 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Potential risks to people were not always effectively managed and recorded to ensure staff always had sufficient guidance.
Medicines were safely administered. Infection control processes were in place. Staff were safely recruited and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. The provider followed appropriate safeguarding processes.
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.
Management had oversight and governance of the service. Audits and surveys were regularly conducted. The service worked in partnership with other services to meet people’s needs.
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 12 February 2020).
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding.
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, which will help inform when we next inspect.
We found the following examples of good practice:
The provider was following best practice guidance to prevent visitors to the home spreading the Covid-19 infection. All visitors were screened for symptoms of acute respiratory infection before being allowed to enter the home. The home had a stock of personal protective equipment (PPE) for visitors to use in the reception area and there was a bin provided for PPE after use. The provider requested that visitors book visiting appointments and one visitor was permitted at a time for a period of 30 minutes. Visitors were permitted to visit residents in their rooms and a larger visiting room was used on occasion. Visitors were required to take a lateral flow test and the home registered the result of this test. Visitors were supported to wear a face covering when visiting. There were multiple signs on the premises about infection prevention and control (IPC) and PPE.
The provider understood and was meeting Covid-19 vaccination requirements. The provider supported alternative forms of maintaining social contact for friends and relatives; for example, video calling using tablets, visits in the communal gardens during the summer months and using a telephone to communicate. During a recent outbreak of Covid-19, the provider had stopped visiting at the home. It had emailed and telephoned families to let them know of the reasons for this. The provider had a process for the monitoring of residents for Covid-19 symptoms and completed lateral flow testing of residents before and after external visits. The provider had completed risk assessments for residents, which it had reviewed, where it considered the vulnerabilities of residents and how risks could be mitigated.
The provider had a process in place for the isolation of residents in the case of positive Covid-19 tests and if staff tested positive for Covid-19. During a recent outbreak, residents were isolated to their rooms and staff working with these residents were restricted to working on that unit. PPE was readily available and there was a bin at the exit of each of the residents’ rooms so that staff could discard PPE when they let the room. Laundry bags were placed in the residents’ rooms and were collected and washed separately from the laundry of other residents. Rooms were cleaned in the morning and evening each day.
The provider had a process for admitting residents and there were clear procedures to be followed for people admitted to the home.
The provider had an IPC lead who was responsible for the oversight of IPC. Management at the home would seek advice from this lead if required. Audits were undertaken to review compliance with IPC responsibilities where actions were identified and were in progress. An annual statement for infection control had been completed in January 2022 which identified that training in IPC and Covid-19 awareness was required for some members of staff. Use of PPE at the home was in accordance with current government guidance.
The provider had supported staff during the Covid-19 pandemic. The provider had a staff member who ensured that residents were engaged and had activities available.
The provider ensured that the home was well ventilated, with windows and doors opened where appropriate to facilitate ventilation. The home had a separate laundry and good practice for linen and laundry guidance was followed.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Marling Court is a care home providing personal and nursing care for older people, At the time of the inspection, there were 37 people using the service. The provider is Country Court Care Homes 2 Limited and is situated in the Hampton area of south west London.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People said they enjoyed the experience of living at Marling Court and staff said it was a good place to work. Everyone thought the home was a safe place to live and work in. Risks to people were assessed, enabling them to enjoy their lives and take acceptable risks, whilst keeping safe. The home reported, investigated and recorded accidents and incidents and safeguarding concerns. There were enough appropriately recruited staff to meet people’s needs. Medicine was safely administered.
People’s equality and diversity needs were met, and they did not experience discrimination. Well-trained and supervised staff spoke to people in a clear way, that they could understand. People were encouraged to discuss their health needs with staff, and they had access to community-based health care professionals. Staff protected people from nutrition and hydration risks and people were encouraged to choose healthy and balanced diets that also met their likes, dislikes and preferences. The premises were adapted to meet people’s needs. Transition between services was based on people’s needs and best interests.
The home had a warm, welcoming and friendly atmosphere with staff providing care and support in a way people liked. We met staff who were caring and compassionate. We saw many positive interactions taking place between people, staff and each-other during our visit. Staff observed people’s privacy, dignity and confidentiality and encouraged and supported them to be independent. People had access to advocates, if required.
People’s needs were assessed, reviewed and they received person centred care. People did not suffer social interaction, had choices and pursued their interests and hobbies. People were provided with information, to make decisions and end of life wishes were identified. Complaints were investigated and recorded.
The home’s culture was open, positive and honest with transparent management and leadership. The organisational vision and values were clearly set out. Service quality was frequently reviewed, and areas of staff and management responsibility and accountability established. Audits were carried out and records kept up to date. Good community links and working partnerships were established. Registration requirements were met.
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.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at the last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was good (published 15 July 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.
Marling Court is a care home with accommodation for up to 37 people who are frail elderly and people with dementia.
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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
In April 2015, our inspection found that the service was overall good with good for all five questions.
People and their relatives told us that this was a good place to live; staff were very nice and provided support and care that was respectful and compassionate. People were provided with opportunities to do as they wished and joined in the activities provided if they wanted to.
The home’s atmosphere was warm, welcoming and inclusive. People that visited told us that they were always made welcome. People using the service, their relatives and staff said the home provided a safe environment for people to live and staff to work in. The home was well maintained, clean and well decorated.
The records were kept up to date, including people’s care plans that contained clearly recorded, fully completed, and regularly reviewed information. This enabled staff to perform their duties well.
The staff were very familiar with people who used the service, their routines, likes, dislikes and preferences. During the inspection people received the same level of attentive service and everyone was treated equally. Staff were well trained, had appropriate skills and qualifications and were focussed on providing individualised support in a professional, friendly and caring way. They also made themselves accessible to people using the service and their relatives as required. Staff said the training they had received was good, enabled them to do their jobs and they received good support from the registered manager and team. There were also opportunities for career advancement.
People using the service were protected from nutrition and hydration associated risks with balanced diets that also met their likes, dislikes and preferences. People and their relatives said the choice of meals and quality of the food provided was very good and staff encouraged them to discuss health needs. They also had access to community based health care professionals, such as district nurses should they be required.
People and their relatives told us the home’s management team were approachable, responsive, encouraged feedback and consistently monitored and assessed the quality of the service provided.
This was an unannounced inspection that took place on 28 and 29 April 2015.
Marling Court is a care home with accommodation for up to 37 frail elderly individuals and people with dementia.
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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
This was the first inspection under new proprietors. At this inspection the home met the regulations inspected against.
People and their relatives told us the home provided a good service and they enjoyed living there and there was enough staff. The staff team were caring, attentive and provided the care and support they needed in a friendly and kind way. The home provided an atmosphere that was enjoyable and people said it was a nice to live.
The records were comprehensive and kept up to date. They contained clearly recorded, fully completed, and regularly reviewed information. This enabled staff to perform their duties well. People and their relatives were encouraged to discuss health needs with staff and had access to community based health professionals, as required. They were protected from nutrition and hydration associated risks with balanced diets that also met their likes, dislikes and preferences. Relatives were positive about the choice and quality of food available.
The home was well maintained, furnished, clean and provided a safe environment for people to live and work in.
The staff we spoke with were very knowledgeable about the people they worked with and field they worked in. They had appropriate skills, training and were focussed on providing individualised care and support in a professional, friendly and supportive way. Staff said they were a little apprehensive as this was a new organisation, although so far the organisation’s representative had been, open, honest and supportive.
People using the service, staff and relatives said the management team at the home, were approachable, responsive, encouraged feedback from people and consistently monitored and assessed the quality of the service provided.