You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 February 2020

About the service

Webster Court is an extra care housing complex providing personal care and support to people aged over 50 who have either experienced homelessness in the past or are at risk of becoming homeless. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection visit, 24 people were receiving personal care.

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

People told us they felt safe using the service. Systems were in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and they were supported to manage these. People received their medicines when they needed them and there were enough staff to provide support to people when they required this.

The provider was pro-active at identifying and acquiring specialist training for staff in subjects that reflected people’s individual needs and experiences. This ensured staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to support people effectively.

Staff strongly advocated for people and worked closely with other organisations and professionals to ensure people received support with their healthcare needs when they required this. Professionals were complimentary about how well the staff worked with them, telling us the service was highly thought of within the professional community.

People told us their consent had been sought before they received support. Staff had a good knowledge on how to support people in line with the relevant legislation. However, systems to ensure other individuals could legally consent on behalf of a person needed to be more robust. We have made a recommendation in this area.

Staff were kind and caring. They treated people with dignity and respect. The provider ensured staff had time to spend with people, so they could get to know them. Staff were respectful of treating people as individuals and as equals. People’s privacy and dignity was respected, and they were supported to become more independent to enhance their sense of wellbeing.

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. They had been fully involved in deciding what support they required when using the service. People received support in line with their individual needs, choices and preferences.

People’s wishes were sought regarding the end of their life and these were respected and fulfilled. The service had received external accreditation for the quality of care they provided to people at this time.

Good leadership was in place. The provider and registered manager promoted an open, person-centred culture where people and staff were treated with respect and were valued. Robust governance systems were in place to monitor the quality of care and support provided to people. The provider and registered manager demonstrated a commitment to continually improve the quality of support people received.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 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.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 February 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 February 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 February 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 February 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 6 February 2020

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.