You are here

A review of one or more of the ratings contained within the inspection report has been carried out at the request of the provider. Further to the review the ratings within this report have changed.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 10 April 2020

Firs Court is part of the charity, The Fircroft Trust. Firs Court is divided into three parts, a care home offering accommodation and personal care for up to nine people in purpose-built accommodation, supported living services for six people, and four adjacent houses for independent living for six people. All the people who live at Firs Court have a learning and or physical disability. Not everyone who lives in supported living or independent living receives a regulated activity.

Firs Court can accommodate a total of 25 people and 21 people were living at Firs Court on the day we visited, of which ten were receiving a regulated activity.

The service was registered before the development of Registering the Right Support guidance. However, the service follows the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service

People and their relatives told us they were safe and well treated. Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people from harm. Risks to people had been assessed and staff knew how to manage these risks safely. Staff worked with people to support them to understand possible risks. There was a process to identify learning from accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and recruitment checks were carried out before staff started work. There were robust measure in places to protect people from the risk of infection. Medicines were managed safely but arrangements for as required medicines did not always follow best practice guidance.

We have made a recommendation that the provider consult best practice guidance on the administration of as required medicines and incorporates that into its processes.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their changing needs, empowered them and offered them choices. People were supported to develop interests and engage in opportunities to socialise and be a part of the wider community. The registered manager was proactive in supporting people’s communication needs to ensure they had information in a format that met their needs.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Staff received a range of training and support to meet people’s needs effectively. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. Staff worked closely with a range of health professionals and ensure people had access to a range of healthcare services when needed. Health professionals were positive about the care and support people received from the service and how well staff knew and understood them.

Staff asked for people’s consent before they provided care or support. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People and their relatives told us staff treated them wi

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 10 April 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 10 April 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 10 April 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 10 April 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 10 April 2020

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.