You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 August 2018

Thurn 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.

Thurn Court accommodates up to 44 people in one adapted building and provides accommodation. The service specialises in caring for older people including those with physical disabilities and people living with dementia. This includes the assessment unit for up to six people discharged from hospital for short term placement to assess ongoing care and support needs.

At the previous comprehensive inspection in February 2017 we rated the service as ‘requires improvement. We found there were not enough staff, people did not always receive person centred care, there was a lack of effective leadership and the provider’s quality assurance system was not used effectively. The provider was asked to complete an action plan to tell us what they would do to meet legal requirement for the breaches.

We carried out a focused inspection of Thurn Court on 10 August 2017. This inspection was done to check that improvements to meet legal requirements planned by the provider after our 15 February 2017 inspection had been made. We inspected the service against three of the five questions we ask about services: is the service ‘safe’, ‘responsive’ and ‘well led’? We found improvements had been made but we were unable to change the overall rating.

On 8 November 2017 another focused inspection was carried out in response to concerns about people’s safety and the management of the service. The team inspected the service against two of the five questions we ask about services: is the service ‘safe’ and ‘well led’? The service continued to be rated as 'requires improvement' because there was a lack of oversight to monitor the quality of care provided.

The provider was asked to send us an action plan that outlined how they planned to make the required improvements to meet the legal requirement. No action plan was received. We took this into account when we inspected the service.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection and our focused inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Thurn Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

This inspection took place on 27 June 2017 and was unannounced. We returned on 28 June 2018 announced to complete the inspection. At the time of our inspection visit 39 people were in residence.

We found that the provider had made the required improvements to meet the legal requirement. The overall rating of Thurn Court has improved to Good.

Thurn Court 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.

We found the provider had made improvements to how they monitored the service provided. The provider’s quality assurance system had been used effectively. Regular audits and checks were carried out and action taken when shortfalls were identified. There were arrangements in place for the service to make sure that action was taken and lessons learned when things went wrong, to improve safety across the service.

People were supported to stay safe. Staff recruitment procedures were followed. Staff were trained in safeguarding and other relevant safety procedures to ensure people were safe and protected from avoidable harm and abuse. There were enough staff to support people. Staffing levels were kept under review to ensure people received sufficient staff support.

Risk associated with people’s needs had been assessed; safety measures were put in place. Staff were provided with clear guidance and information to follow to meet people’s needs.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 17 August 2018

The service improved to good.

Risks associated to people�s needs were managed safely and monitored. People were supported with their medicines safely.

Staff were recruited safely. Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from harm. There were enough staff to provide care and support to people when they needed it.

People lived in a safe environment. Staff were trained in safety procedures and followed the infection control procedure. Lessons were learnt and improvements made when things went wrong.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 August 2018

The service improved to good.

People needs were assessed. They made decisions about all aspects of their care which ensured their needs were effectively met. Staff sought people�s consent and their human and legal rights were respected.

People were supported to maintain their nutrition, health and well-being where required. Staff worked in partnership with other health care professionals top meet people�s ongoing health needs.

People received support from staff team who had the necessary skills and knowledge. Improved systems were in place to provide staff with on-going training, support and supervision.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 August 2018

The service improved to good.

People were cared for by caring and kind staff. People had been involved in planning their care. People were treated with dignity and respect, and staff ensured their privacy was maintained.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 August 2018

The service remained responsive.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 August 2018

The service improved to good.

The registered manager provided good leadership. They understood their role and responsibilities and worked in partnership with other agencies.

People and staff�s views about the service were sought and used to drive improvements. They were all confident that any concerns raised with the registered manager would be listened to and acted on.

The provider�s governance system was used effectively to assess, monitor the quality of service and bring about improvements. Policies, procedures and systems in place enabled staff to provide quality care.