You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

We are carrying out a review of quality at Dimensions 11 Kilford Court. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 March 2017

The inspection took place on the 31 January and 2 February 2017. The inspection was unannounced.

Dimensions are a specialist provider of a wide range of services for people with learning disabilities and people who experience autism. 11 Kilford Court provides care and support for up to six people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection there were four people living at the home some of whom were also living with physical disabilities and with dementia. The home is arranged over two floors. The ground floor consists of four bedrooms, a dining and kitchen area, a laundry room and a communal lounge which also had a sensory area. There is also an adapted bathroom and a level access shower room on this floor. This floor is fully accessible to wheelchair users. Two further bedrooms and the office and staff sleep in room were located on the first floor which were accessed by stairs only. The home has a large accessible garden to the rear and parking to the front.

The service 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager also managed another Dimensions services and was supported in their roles by an assistant manager.

At the last inspection in January 2016, the service was rated “Requires Improvement” overall and there were breaches of Regulations associated with managing risk and ensuring staff had received appropriate support. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and the service was now “Good” overall with no breaches of legal requirements.

Since our last inspection, improvements had been made to ensure that risks to people’s health and wellbeing were adequately assessed and planned for. Staff were now receiving regular supervision and were being supported to undertake nationally recognised qualifications.

The registered manager was taking robust action to ensure the landlord took timely action to make improvements to the property.

Staff spoke positively about the leadership of the service. Morale was found to have significantly improved with staff telling us that the registered manager worked effectively with them and encouraged them to express their views about how the service might improve.

Improvements had been made which helped to ensure people's rights were protected. Staff had acted in accordance with the requirements of the mental capacity act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where people were able to express choices, these were respected.

Whilst each person had an individualised weekly plan of activities, more could be done to enhance the quality of interactions with people and offer more varied and meaningful opportunities for active support.

Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns to their management team.

Appropriate arrangements were in place to manage people’s medicines. Medicines were only administered by staff who had been trained to do this.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment practices were followed.

Staff received a range of training which enabled them to provide people with appropriate care.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink. Staff recognised when people’s physical health needs changed and ensured that relevant referrals were made to health care professionals.

Staff showed people kindness, patience and respect. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of the people they were supporting. They were well informed about people’s communication needs and used this effectively to provide person centred care.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the meani

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 17 March 2017

The service was safe.

Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were adequately assessed and planned for.

Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and had a good understanding of the signs of abuse and neglect. Staff were clear about what they must do if they suspected abuse was taking place.

Staffing levels were adequate and enabled the delivery of care and support in line with peoples assessed needs.

Medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 March 2017

The service was effective

Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were suitably trained, supervised and appraised.

People's rights were protected because staff had acted in accordance with the requirements of the mental capacity act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where people were able to express choices, these were respected.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink.

Staff recognised when people’s physical health needs changed and ensured that relevant referrals were made to health care professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 March 2017

The service was caring.

Staff showed people kindness, patience and respect. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of the people they were supporting. They were well informed about people’s communication needs and used this effectively to provide person centred care.

People were treated with dignity and respect and were encouraged to live as independently as possible.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 17 March 2017

The service was not always responsive.

Whilst each person had an individualised weekly plan of activities, more could be done to enhance the quality of interactions with people and offer more varied and meaningful opportunities for active support.

People’s care and support plans were personalised and their preferences and choices were detailed throughout their care records. This supported staff to deliver responsive care.

Complaints policies and procedures were in place and were available in easy read formats.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 March 2017

The service was well led.

Staff spoke positively about the leadership of the service. Morale was found to have significantly improved with staff telling us that the registered manager worked effectively with them and encouraged them to express their views about how the service might improve.

There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving the best possible support.