Background to this inspection
Updated
13 May 2016
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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 17 March 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.
Before the inspection we examined previous inspection records and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.
We spoke with nine people, three members of staff, the manager and the regional manager. We looked at the care records for ten people, including their care plans and risk assessments. We looked at staff recruitment files, medicine records, minutes of meetings and documents relating to the monitoring of the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.
Updated
13 May 2016
Shaftesbury Court is a care home providing care and support for up to 15 people with a physical disability. At the time of our visit there were 15 people using the service.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on the 17 March 2016.
The home had a registered manager in place. 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 requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about the service is run.
People told us they felt that the service was a safe place, and that the staff made them feel secure.
People told us and we observed that there were enough staff available to support them. The service had in place robust recruitment procedures which ensured that staff had the appropriate skills, background and qualifications for the role.
Staff told us they felt supported by the management of the service and that the training they received was effective in providing them with the knowledge they needed. People made positive comments about the staff, the management team and the regional manager.
The service was complying with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
Assessments of people’s capacity to make decisions had been made appropriately. The service had appropriately considered whether DoLS referrals needed to be made for anyone using the service.
There were effective systems in place to ensure that medicines were stored, managed and administered safely. People received appropriate support to take their medicines.
People were given a choice of food and drink and provided with the support they required to prepare and eat their meals.
People were supported by staff and the management team to engage in meaningful activity and live full and active lives.
People actively participated in the planning of their care. One person had been provided with specialist equipment which allowed them to write their entire care plan independently.
There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to identify shortfalls or areas for improvement. There was an open culture at the service. People using the service, their relatives and staff were given the opportunity to express their views and these were acted on by the service. There was a complaints procedure in place and people told us they knew how to make a complaint if they weren’t happy.