April Court

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.This means the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There was a positive culture at April Court of putting people's needs and preferences first, supporting them kindly and respectfully, and doing their best to ensure people were not disadvantaged in any way. The registered manager and other staff demonstrated this in the way they spoke about life at April Court and the people living there. It was mirrored in their approach to people's care and support.

Equality, diversity and human rights were incorporated into staff training. Staff discussed their relevance and application to people's care during supervision and staff meetings.

Relatives found the registered manager and staff approachable.

The registered manager frequently spent time with people and staff at April Court and knew them well. Shortfalls were addressed swiftly, and staff knew poor practice would not be accepted.

The registered manager had the knowledge and skills necessary to run a care home safely and effectively, maintaining effective oversight.

The provider and registered manager recognised the need for the professional development of staff. Some senior staff had obtained or were working towards care management qualifications. Staff champions for various aspects of the service had training and development from the provider for these roles and took part in relevant provider policy reviews.

Staff understood their responsibility to speak up about wrongdoing, including poor practice or health and safety concerns. They knew how to report their concerns to external organisations, although they were confident the registered manager would listen to them and act as necessary.

Contact numbers for speaking up to external organisations were readily available for staff, including being displayed in the locker room.

How to speak up was discussed regularly in supervision and at staff meetings. Staff records reflected how the registered manager had acted swiftly, effectively and proportionately on concerns received.

The registered manager recognised and valued the diversity of the staff team. Staff with diverse protected characteristics such as disability told us how they had been treated supportively and fairly. There were also examples where some staff working hours had been adjusted to take account of their caring roles for members of their family.

The provider had people management policies to support equality, diversity and inclusion in the workforce, such as reasonable adjustments for disabled staff. They published their gender pay gap data annually.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. They discussed the expectations of their roles in regular supervision meetings and in staff meetings. The registered manager viewed supervision meetings as important and ensured they were prioritised.

The provider's governance structures and computerised data assisted the registered manager to keep close oversight of the service.

There were effective systems for assessing, monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service. These included regular audits of various aspects of care and record keeping, of health and safety, and of how the service was run. The registered manager ensured any shortfalls were put right.

The service notified CQC of significant events such as safeguarding adults referrals, as the law requires.

Plans were in place for how the service would manage an emergency, such as the failure of utility supplies or computer systems.

Confidential personal information was kept securely. Staff had unique user identities and passwords to access the computerised care planning and recording system. They had training in data protection and security requirements.

Relatives spoke highly of the care and support provided.

Relatives spoke of effective and open communication with the service, being kept informed as they needed, for example if the person became unwell. A relative described how staff had "just the right balance with keeping in touch", letting them know what was important but "not overdoing it".

There were strong links with health and social care professionals involved with people's care. The service also worked with further education providers to provide placements for health and social care students.

The service had received compliments from health and social care professionals about the way staff worked with them to help ensure the best outcomes for people.

People's care records reflected regular communication with health and social care professionals involved in people's care.

The registered manager and staff ensured people and their families were involved in planning and evaluating developments at April Court. There were regular meetings and informal discussions with people living at April Court. The registered manager had recently introduced quality meetings for families. Each meeting enabled them to consider and contribute their views on a theme, such as people's safety. Relatives spoke positively about these meetings.

Staff who held roles as champions for aspects of care and support at April Court spoke enthusiastically about their roles. The provider trained and developed the champions, who in turn shared good practice they had learned among their colleagues.

There were processes to ensure learning happened when things went wrong and from examples of good practice. The management team reviewed accidents and incidents to identify potential trends that suggested the need for further learning and changes.

As well as regular refresher training, the provider arranged additional staff training as needed. For example, during the inspection there was some face-to-face training about managing risk because the management team had identified this was needed.