Archived: Lotus Court

Updated 22 September 2015

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 5 August 2015 and was unannounced.

The inspection was carried by two inspectors.

We contacted commissioners for social care, responsible for funding some of the people who used the service and health and social care professionals who provided support to people and asked them for their views about the service. We reviewed the provider’s statement of purpose which was sent to us at the point of registration of the service. This document has information about the Lotus Court and the range of services it provides.

During the inspection visit we spoke with three people who used the service and observed how staff supported another three people who had limited communication. We also spoke with a visitor, a relative of a person living in 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.

We spoke with the registered manager and four care staff, day care staff and house-keeping staff with their interpreter. We spoke with the provider who was present during our inspection of the service. We also spoke with a visiting health care professional.

We looked at the care records for three people to find out how they were supported with their daily care and support needs. We looked at staff recruitment and training records. We looked at records in relation to the maintenance of the environment and equipment, complaints and the quality assurance and governance.

We requested additional information from the provider in relation to staff training, record of meetings, provider’s visit report and confirmation that action had been taken to ensure window restrictors had been installed to ensure the premises were safe. We received this information in a timely manner.

Updated 22 September 2015

This inspection took place on 5 August 2015 and was unannounced.

Lotus Court is registered to provide residential care and support for up to 19 people with a learning disability who present behaviours that challenge and who, have complex needs. At the time of our inspection there were 15 people using the service. Accommodation is divided into three large bungalows with a washrooms, kitchenette, dining room and lounges. Two bungalows accommodated six people with seven people in the third bungalow. The majority of bedrooms have ensuite washroom facilities.

A registered manager was 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.

People told us they felt safe at Lotus Court. Staff were trained in the safeguarding (protecting people who used care services from abuse) procedures and knew what to do if they were concerned about the welfare of people who used the service.

People were supported by knowledgeable staff who understood people’s individual and diverse needs and how to support them to keep them safe. Where risks to people had been identified, staff had the information they needed to help keep them safe.

Staff recruitment practices were robust and appropriate checks were carried out before people started work. People told there were enough staff on duty to meet their needs and to enable them to go out with staff support, when needed, and to access local services.

Medicines were stored safely and people received their medicines at the right time.

Staff told us they had received induction training and ongoing training that helped them to understand the needs of people and how to provide the care and support they needed. Staff had received training that was sufficient to meet people's needs. Staff received regular support and supervision to ensure they practice was monitored and they could make suggestions to develop the service and people’s quality of life.

People made decisions about their care needs and their lifestyle choices were supported by staff and were not restricted. Staff had access to people’s care records and knew how to support people and what was important to them.

People were provided with a choice of meals that met their dietary needs. Staff supported people who needed help to eat and drink in a sensitive manner.

People’s health needs had been assessed and met by the nurses and health care professionals. Staff sought appropriate medical advice and support from health care professionals when people’s health was of concern and they had routine health checks.

People spoke positively about the staff’s attitude and approach, and had developed positive working relationships with them. People told us staff were kind and caring. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained, their choice of lifestyle was respected and their independence was promoted.

People had the opportunity to visit Lotus Court and had their needs assessed before they moved in. People were involved in the development and review of their care plans, which included their preferences, choice of lifestyle and interests.

People told us about how staff supported them to pursue their interests, hobbies and activities that were important to them. People attended meetings where they could discuss how the service was run, made decisions about trips and activities they wanted to have and ensured their views were heard about things that they would like to change. People were confident that any concerns would be responded to by the registered manager and the provider.

Staff were complimentary about the support they received from the registered manager. Regular meetings, supervision and appraisals provided staff with an opportunity to develop and influence the service they provided and improve people’s quality of life.

The provider had a robust assurance system in place that assessed the quality of service provided. Information gathered from the internal audits carried out and views from people who used the service, their relatives and staff were used to continually develop the service.