• Care Home
  • Care home

Windsor Court

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2 Wallingford Mount, Allerton, Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD15 7TN (01274) 557717

Provided and run by:
Horizon Healthcare Homes Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 4 March 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 15 February 2021 and was announced.

Overall inspection


Updated 4 March 2021

We inspected Windsor Court on 24 May and 01 June 2018. Both days of the inspection were unannounced. This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered in June 2017.

Windsor Court is a purpose-built home which provides accommodation and personal care for up to eight people with a learning/physical disability. It is in a residential area of Allerton and is close to local shops and amenities. At the time of our visit there were seven people using the service.

Windsor 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.

The service was working 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.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

On the first day of inspection the registered manager was on annual leave and therefore information was provided by the deputy manager and the director of operations for the organisation (Horizon Healthcare Homes Limited ). However, the registered manager was present on the second day of inspection.

We found the environment at Windsor Court had been well planned. The bedrooms were large single rooms with en-suite toilets and showers. There was a large lounge, sensory room, kitchen/dining area and communal bathroom and toilet facilities. Corridors and doorways were wide which made access to all the rooms easy for wheelchair users and overhead tracking and hoists were available in some bedrooms and communal bathing facilities.

Policies and procedures ensured people were protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm. Staff told us they had regular safeguarding training, and were confident they knew how to recognise and report potential abuse. Where concerns had been brought to the registered manager’s attention, they had worked in partnership with the relevant authorities to make sure issues were fully investigated and appropriate action taken to make sure people were protected.

The registered manager and staff were observed to have positive relationships with people living in the home. People were relaxed in the company of staff and there were no restrictions placed on visiting times for friends and relatives.

We found staff were respectful to people, attentive to their needs and treated people with kindness and respect in their day to day care. The atmosphere in the home was happy and relaxed. From our observations it was clear staff knew individual people well and were knowledgeable about their needs, preferences and personalities.

Appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DOLS) applications had been made to the local authority and people's mental capacity to make their own decisions had been assessed and recorded in line the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have 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.

Each person had a support plan that was person centred and sufficiently detailed to ensure they were at the centre of their care. People’s care and support was kept under review and, where appropriate, they were involved in decisions about their care. Risks to people’s health and safety had been identified, assessed and managed safely. Relevant health and social care professionals provided advice and support when people’s needs changed.

There were enough staff to support people when they needed assistance and people received support in a timely and calm manner. The registered manager followed a robust recruitment procedure to ensure new staff were suitable to care for vulnerable people and arrangements were in place to make sure staff were trained and supervised.

Medicines were managed safely and people had their medicines when they needed them. Staff administering medicines had been trained and supervised to do this safely.

Appropriate aids and adaptations had been provided to help maintain people’s safety, independence and comfort. People had arranged their bedrooms as they wished and had brought personal possessions with them to maintain the homeliness.

There were a range of leisure activities for people to participate in, including both activities and events in the home and in the local community and it was apparent people enjoyed a full and active social life.

We saw the complaints policy was available in both a written and easy read [Pictorial] format. The policy detailed the arrangements for raising complaints, responding to complaints and the expected timescales within which a response would be received.

There was a quality assurance monitoring system in place that was designed to continually monitor and identified shortfalls in service provision. Audit results were analysed for themes and trends and there was evidence that learning from incidents took place and appropriate changes were made to procedures or work practices if required.

The provider had clear values and the registered manager and staff were true to these values in their day to day work.

We found all fundamental standards were being met. Further information is in the detailed findings below.