We carried out a review of the data available to us about Housing 21 - Mulberry 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 Housing 21 - Mulberry Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Housing and Care 21-Mulberry Court provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.
Not everyone living at Mulberry Court receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. There were 45 people receiving the regulated activity of ‘personal care’ from Mulberry Court at the time of the inspection.
Mulberry court consists of 60 self-contained flats with one or two-person occupancies. People had access to shared communal lounges and, shared laundry facilities. There was also an on-site café, dining room and hairdressing salon.
There was a registered manager in post at the service. 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run
The previous inspection was completed in March 2016 and the service was rated ‘Good’ overall. At this inspection the service was again rated 'Good'.
People received safe care and treatment. Staff had been trained in safeguarding and had a good understanding of safeguarding policies and procedures. The administration and management of people’s medicines was safe. There were sufficient numbers of staff working at the service to support people with their required care. There was a robust recruitment process to ensure suitable staff were recruited.
The risk posed to individual people had been assessed and suitable action had been taken to minimise their personal risk. Where people had suffered an accident, themes and trends had been analysed, and action had been taken to ensure people were safe and plans put in place to minimise the risk of re-occurrence.
Staff had received training appropriate to their role. People were supported to access health professionals when required. They could choose what they liked to eat and drink and were supported on a regular basis to participate in meaningful activities.
People were supported in a personalised way that encouraged them to be as independent as possible. Choice was promoted at all times and the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). People were given information about the service in ways they wanted to and could understand.
There was a positive culture throughout the service which focused on providing person centred care and maximising people’s independence. Staff were compassionate and kind, and were highly motivated to offer person centred care. People and relatives, we spoke with told us staff were caring. The principles of respect, dignity, compassion and, equality and diversity were embedded in the service. People were treated as equals regardless of age, gender or personal beliefs.
The service was responsive to people’s needs. Care plans were person centred to guide staff to provide consistent, high quality care and support. Daily records were detailed and provided evidence of person centred care. Where required, people were supported to make decisions about end of life care which met their individual needs and preferences.
The service was well led. People, staff and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. Quality assurance checks were in place and identified actions to improve the service. The registered manager sought feedback from people and their relatives to continually improve the service.
We last inspected in October 2013 and found the provider was meeting all of the requirements of the regulations at that time.
There was registered manager in post on the day of our inspection. 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.
People and their relatives were positive about living at Mulberry Court. People were safe and looked after well at the service. Care staff managed the risks of people’s care and ensured people had the medicine they needed to meet their needs. People’s independence was promoted and care staff understood they were caring for people in their own homes.
People enjoyed living at Mulberry Court and were encouraged to arrange their own activities and events. Mulberry Court had a social committee which arranged external entertainers. People could use the communal lounges in the home for their social events.
Care staff were supported by a committed provider and had access to training, supervision and professional development. There were enough staff with appropriate skills, to meet the needs of people living at Mulberry Court. The registered manager was engaged with constant recruitment of care staff. Care staff could request training and development. Staff spoke positively about the service and the support they provided.
The provider ensured people, their relatives and external healthcare professionals views were listened to and acted upon. The service worked hard to engage the local community in the service. People and healthcare professionals spoke positively about the management and the service.
At the time of the inspection Mulberry Court were supporting 60 people to live independently in their own flats. The registered manager and senior carer were available throughout the day and both were knowledgeable about the people they supported. They were aware of the policies, procedures and systems in place to ensure the continued smooth running of the service.
People we spoke with told us 'If I need anything outside of my normal visit that is urgent I know I can press my pendent and the staff will come to assist me'. Another person said 'Staff arrive on time for my calls and they ask me to sign their visit sheet'.
This was a positive visit and we found that the provider was compliant in all five outcomes that we looked at.
We spoke with relatives during the visit. They all spoke highly about the service and staff. One person who lived with their relative told us "I'm happy with the care my relative receives I cannot praise the staff enough'.
Staff told us that they would not tolerate any form of abuse and would report any suspicions to senior care staff and the registered manager. Staff told us "I would report concerns to the manager to ensure people feel safe' and 'Safeguarding is taken very seriously and procedures are followed if allegations are made'.
People that we spoke with during our visit told us, "The carers here are wonderful and very hard working' and 'The staff are very kind to me, nothing is too much trouble'.
People were given support by the provider to make a comment or complaint where they needed assistance. We asked people what they would do if they were unhappy with the service they received and wanted to make a complaint, people told us "I would tell the care staff if I was unhappy and ask to see the office staff' and 'I would fill out the complaints form and hand this in to the main office'.