We carried out a review of the data available to us about Didsbury 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 Didsbury Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Didsbury Court is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 20 people. The service provides support to older people. At the time of our inspection there were 15 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt safe living at the service. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and knew where to report them if they had concerns.
People were protected from being cared for by unsuitable staff because pre-employment checks had been carried out. However, some checks of staffs’ employment history had not been completed fully. We made a recommendation to the provider about this.
Risks to people's health and safety were identified and guidance was in place to ensure people were protected from avoidable harm. Environmental risks were managed well in order to keep people safe. People were protected from the risk of infection and the service was clean and free from odour.
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.
Medicines were stored, managed, and administered safely and records regarding people's medicines were completed effectively. People received their medicines when they needed them and as prescribed.
People, relatives and staff were positive about the management of the service and the changes being made.
Systems and processes were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. People and relatives were asked for their views and feedback regarding people's care and support.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good. (Published 21 September 2017)
Why we inspected
The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about the management of risks in relation to skincare, nutrition and hydration and the staff culture at the service. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the safe and well led sections of this report.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Didsbury Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Recommendations
We made a recommendation in relation to safe recruitment processes.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Didsbury Court is a residential care home providing personal care to 16 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can accommodate up to 17 people in one adapted building. Some people were living with dementia. Didsbury Court does not provide nursing care. Where needed this is provided by the community nursing team.
People's experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt safe living at Didsbury Court. People were protected from the risk of harm. Risks were managed safely, and safe processes were in place.
There was a relaxed atmosphere between people and staff. Staff were kind, caring and attentive. People told us,“They’re very helpful and kind”, “You’re treated as an individual, anything you want they’ll get”, and “We have quite a laugh.”
Staff had enough time to meet people's needs and spend time with them in conversation. Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs effectively. Staff told us they were well supported in their role.
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 were involved in making decisions about their care and supported to maintain their independence. Care plans contained detailed up-to-date information about each person's needs and preferences. People received personalised care from staff who knew them well.
People enjoyed taking part in social activities, going out in the local community, and spending time with family and friends. People were supported to attend their local church.
The service was well managed. When speaking about the registered manager, people said, “Wonderful manager” and “So well organised.” Quality assurance processes ensured people received high quality care.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 21 September 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our reinspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
There was a registered manager in post. The registered manager had been registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service since 12 May 2017. 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.
At the last inspection in March 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that although there had been concerns raised about the quality and safety of the service since the last inspection, they had been addressed and the service therefore remained Good in all areas.
Why the service is rated Good.
People remained safe at the home. People told us there were adequate numbers of suitable staff to meet their needs and to spend time socialising with them. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely.
People continued to receive effective care because staff had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. People’s healthcare needs were monitored by the staff and people had access to healthcare professionals according to their individual needs. 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.
The home continued to provide a caring service to people. People told us, and we observed, that staff were kind and patient and treated people with dignity and respect. One person said, "Nothing's too much trouble for any of the staff. [Manager’s name], [provider’s name] and the staff have all gone beyond what I expected to help me here”. People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received. The service was able to provide effective support to people at the end of their lives.
The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Care plans were person centred and provided clear guidance for staff which enabled them to meet people’s needs according to their preferences. People could choose to participate in a range of activities. People knew how to make a complaint and told us they had confidence in the complaints process. There had been no formal complaints since the last inspection.
The service was well led. The provider and registered manager had been proactive in working with the local authority quality improvement team to address concerns raised about the quality and safety of the service. Significant improvements had been made and people told us, “[Manager’s name] has made such a difference, new carpets, new furniture and a lovely atmosphere, and there’s always so much going on” and, "My family member’s been here for two years and things have improved massively since [Manager’s name] took over as the Manager”. The registered manager and provider had effective monitoring systems in place which enabled them ensure the improvements were sustained and identify any further improvements needed.
People and staff told us the provider and registered manager were open and approachable. They were very visible within the home and regularly sought people’s views to make sure they and their representatives were at the heart of any changes. Staff told us they felt well supported, telling us. “I think it’s managed very well. The manager is on top of everything. They deal with any issues you bring to their attention. they take the time to listen to you.”
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Didsbury Court is a care home without nursing situated in Torquay and is operated by Ark Care Homes Ltd. The home is registered to provide accommodation for up to 17 people who require personal care. There were 16 people living there at the time of our inspection.
The service had 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.
This inspection took place on 4 March 2015 and was unannounced. This was the home’s first inspection since change of ownership to Ark Care Homes Ltd.
People told us they were very happy living at Didsbury Court: comments included, “it’s absolutely perfect”, “I can’t imagine living anywhere else” and “I am very impressed”. During the inspection, people and staff were relaxed; there was a calm and pleasant atmosphere. We saw people enjoying a quiz in the morning with staff.
People were involved in planning their care and making decisions about how and when they wished to be supported. Staff used the principles of assessment within the Mental Capacity Act to support them in doing this and to manage risks. This helped ensure people’s rights were protected.
Care plans were drawn up and regularly reviewed through discussion and agreement with the person. These plans provided information on how to support people and keep them safe. For example, how people should be assisted with their mobility. Risks were managed in a way that kept people safe, whilst supporting their right to freedom, for example being free to leave the home as and when they chose. Some people’s freedom was being restricted in order to keep them safe and the registered manager had made applications to have this authorised through legal procedures, as is good practice.
Staff were appropriately trained and skilled. This enabled them to meet the needs of people living at Didsbury Court. These needs included assistance with mobility and skin care, and nutrition. Regular training was provided covering health and safety topics and also topics relevant to people’s health and personal care needs. People told us there was always enough staff on duty and assistance was provided promptly whenever they asked. People were treated with care and respect. Staff understood how to recognise signs of harm or abuse and how it should be reported.
People received their medicines as prescribed, when needed and on time. Medicines were stored and administered safely. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare support.
Menus were balanced and varied. People told us they enjoyed the meals, saying the “the food is lovely” and “there is always a choice with the food.” Menus were planned to suit individual preferences and nutritional needs.
Staff told us the home was well managed and there were good communication systems in place. These included handover sessions between each shift, regular supervision and appraisals, staff meetings, and plenty of opportunity to request advice, support, or express views or concerns. Their comments included “I love working here” and “I’m very happy here.”
There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care and the registered manager was constantly seeking ways of improving the service. For example, after consultation with people the lighting in the communal areas and one bedroom were upgraded and some of the heavier fire doors changed to ones less heavy for people to open. People told us they knew how to make a complaint and were confident they could raise any concerns and these would be listened to and acted upon. The home had received one complaint in the past year, which we had also received, relating to declining standards since the change in ownership, and the home dealt with this appropriately and promptly: we found no evidence at this inspection to support the concerns.
All areas of the home were clean and fresh, with no unpleasant odours, and the building and equipment were well maintained.