You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 October 2018

The inspection took place on 21 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Falconer's Court is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to seven people who live with complex learning and or physical disabilities. There were seven people living at Falconer's Court at the time of this inspection.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 felt safe living at Falconer's Court and we observed staff keeping people safe. Staff were aware of how to keep people safe and risks to people's safety were identified and managed effectively. There were enough suitably trained staff to ensure people’s needs were met and provide care in a safe and effective manner.

The provider had a robust recruitment process in place and undertook checks which helped to ensure that staff employed were appropriate to work in a care environment.

People's medicines were managed safely and effectively by staff who had been trained in the safe administration of medicines.

Staff were well supported by the management team and had team meetings every month and one to one supervision meetings with their line manager. Staff felt supported, valued and motivated.

People received the support they needed to eat a healthy and balanced diet and their health needs were met through access to a range of health care professionals.

People and their relatives were complimentary about the staff team. Staff respected people's dignity and privacy and knew about people's individuals' care and support plans and their daily routines as well as their preferences. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People and their family and/or care manager's had been involved in the development and review of their care plans as much as possible. Family and visitors were able to visit at any time they wished and were made welcome by staff and managers.

The provider had systems and processes in place to obtain feedback from people who used the service, their relatives, and care managers about the quality of the services provided. People's family members were aware of how to raise concerns with the staff or management and were confident that they would be listened to and issues resolved.

The provider had arrangements to monitor health and safety and the quality of the care and support provided for people who used the service.

There was an open and transparent culture in the home and staff had clear roles and responsibilities.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 16 October 2018

The service was safe.

There were enough staff on duty to give people the care they needed. In most cases, appropriate checks had been completed before staff were appointed.

People received safe care and treatment and were protected by the prevention and control of infection.

People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse.

Medicines were safely managed in line with national guidelines.

Effective

Good

Updated 16 October 2018

The service was effective.

Care was delivered in line with national guidance and staff had received training and support.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet.

People were assisted to receive coordinated care and to access ongoing healthcare support.

Suitable arrangements had been made to obtain consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance.

The accommodation was designed, adapted and decorated to meet people’s needs and wishes.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 October 2018

The service was caring.

People received person-centred care and were treated with kindness and respect.

People were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care as far as possible.

People's privacy, dignity and independence were promoted.

Confidential information was kept private.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 October 2018

The service was responsive.

People's care and support was planned in line with their individual care and support needs.

Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and preferences. People were supported to take part in activities that they chose.

There was a complaints system and people knew how to complain.

The service was not supporting anyone at the end of their life.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 October 2018

The service was well led.

There was a registered manager who ensured that care staff understood their responsibilities so that risks and regulatory requirements were met.

People and staff were positive about the leadership at the service. Staff felt supported by the registered manager. The service worked in partnership with a range of other agencies such as local authority safeguarding and commissioning teams.

Regular audits and checks were undertaken at the service to make sure it was safe and running effectively.