We carried out a review of the data available to us about Cranmer 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 Cranmer Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Cranmer Court is a ‘care home’. 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 our inspection there were nine people living in the service. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At the last inspection published on 12 March 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good in all domains. As the service remains good, we have written a shorter version of the report.
People‘s care and support was planned in partnership with them. Staff used individual ways of involving people and people took a key role in the local community and had opportunity to access education and work. People had facilities and support available to them to help them live as fulfilling a life as possible. People had opportunities to take part in activities that reflected their interests and preferences.
People told us how much they enjoyed living at Cranmer Court, spending time with their friends and being given opportunities to live their life.
People were supported by sufficient numbers of appropriately skilled staff to meet their needs and keep them safe. Staff understood their responsibilities in safeguarding people from abuse and knew how to report any concerns they had.
Risks to people’s safety were identified and action taken to keep people as safe as possible. Accidents and incidents were reviewed and measures implemented to reduce the risk of them happening again.
People lived in a service which was kept clean and tidy. People were encouraged to help with cleaning the service and their own private areas of the accommodation.
Medicines were managed and administered in a way to keep people safe. We found one mistake with administration and made a recommendation about this.
People’s needs had been assessed before they moved into the service to ensure staff could provide the support they required. Staff had the training and support they needed to carry out their roles effectively. All staff attended an induction when they started work and had access to ongoing training.
People’s rights under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were respected. Staff understood the importance of gaining people’s consent to their care and how people communicated their decisions.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.
People could make choices about the food they ate and were supported to maintain a healthy diet. People were supported to maintain good health and to obtain treatment when they needed it. Each person had a health action plan which detailed their health needs and the support they needed. Staff worked with external organisations and professionals to help provide the most effective care to people.
The service provided bright and spacious accommodation with access to grounds and outside space. People had been encouraged to choose the décor and were able to personalise their bedrooms.
Staff were kind, caring and compassionate. People had positive relationships with the staff who supported them and there was a homely, caring atmosphere in the home. Staff treated people with respect and maintained their dignity. People were supported to make choices about their care and to maintain relationships with their friends and families.
There were appropriate procedures for managing complaints. Where complaints had been received by the service these had been responded to appropriately.
People, relatives and staff benefited from good leadership provided by the registered manager. Relatives said management was open and transparent and it was clear from our discussions that they had a drive to continuously improve the service people received.
Staff said there was a strong team ethos and they received good support from their colleagues.
People who lived at the service, their relatives and other stakeholders had opportunities to give their views.
The provider’s quality monitoring systems were effective in ensuring people received good quality care and support. Important areas of the service were audited regularly and action plans were developed when areas for improvement were identified. However, there was one area of the service we had a concern about which the audit tools had not identified. We made a recommendation regarding the medicines audit tool.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Cranmer Court is a purpose built, single storey home providing accommodation and personal care for up to ten adults with learning disabilities. It is located in the Moor Allerton area of Leeds, close to local amenities and transport links. There were ten people living at the home on the day of our inspection.
There was not a registered manager when we inspected, however the provider had recruited a manager who was already in post and whose application to be a registered manager with the CQC was under consideration. 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.
Relatives of people who used the service told us they thought people were safe at Cranmer Court. The provider had policies and procedures in place to minimise risks to people including safeguarding and risks arising from care and support needs..
We saw that recruitment was well managed and appropriate background checks were undertaken to ensure new staff were not barred from working with vulnerable people. There were sufficient, appropriately skilled staff to provide care and support at all times..
Medicines were managed ordered, stored and administered safely. Care plans contained clear information about how people preferred to be supported to take medicines.
Relatives told us they thought staff had appropriate skills to provide care and support for people. Staff told us the induction process was thorough and provided them with competencies they needed to be effective in their role. We saw the provider supported staff through the provision of regular and relevant training, and sought information from bodies such as the Autism Society.
Staff were further supported with regular supervision and appraisal.
Care plans contained appropriate mental capacity assessments and best interests decisions. Staff received training in the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and understood how this impacted on the ways in which they worked with people. The provider ensured people had advocacy support where needed. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were in place for all people who used the service. The provider was managing these appropriately.
People had access to healthcare professionals when needed, and we saw visits were documented and care plans amended as required.
We saw evidence people were well supported with nutrition and hydration, and the provider had a policy in place to ensure mealtimes were effective and enjoyable. They included people who used the service in making choices about menus.
Relatives told us there was a caring environment at Cranmer Court and we made observations during the inspection that confirmed this. People’s privacy and dignity were respected.. Families said they were involved in the care planning processes including reviews.
Care plans contained person-centred information which captured people’s likes, dislikes and personality. Individual care plans contained detailed guidance to assist staff provide support in ways which the person preferred..
People who used the service were able to choose activities as they wished, both in and away from the home. We saw people could suggest ideas for days out and we saw these requests were acted on. In addition people had been asked how they wanted their rooms to be furnished and decorated and we saw they had been involved in selecting and purchasing items.
The provider had policies and procedures in place to ensure complaints and concerns were recorded and acted on. Information about how to complain and forms to capture feedback from people who used the service were available in easy read formats.
Staff told us there was a positive and ‘open-door’ culture in the home and said the manager supported them well. The manager told us they had good support from the provider.
Staff and people who used the service were able to contribute to the running of Cranmer Court through regular meetings, An annual survey was undertaken and the outcomes of this used as part of the business planning process.
The manager and provider undertook a rolling programme of audits which monitored the quality of the service. Action plans were put in place when opportunities to improve were identified.