Archived: Regency Court Care Home

Updated 5 October 2018

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 comprehensive inspection took place on 14 and 20 August 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector and an expert by experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR) before the inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make; we used this information to support out inspection plan. We reviewed other information about the service, including safeguarding alerts which had been made and notifications which had been submitted. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. After the inspection, the provider sent us further information about their plans for the service, which we have included in this report.

We met with 14 people and seven people’s relatives and visitors. We observed people's care and treatment, including lunchtime, support with medicines and with activities. We inspected the premises of the home, including the laundry, bathrooms and some people's bedrooms. We spoke with 14 staff, including care workers, registered nurses, domestic, catering, maintenance and activities workers, the receptionist, the registered manager and an area manager.

We 'pathway tracked' six of the people living at the service. This is when we look at people's care documentation in depth, obtain their views on how they found living at the home and make observations of the support they were given. It is an important part of our inspection, as it allows us to capture more detailed information about a sample of people receiving care.

During the inspection we reviewed records. These included four staff recruitment records, the service's training and supervision records, medicines records, risk assessments, accident and incident records, quality audits and policies and procedures.

Updated 5 October 2018

This inspection took place on 14 and 20 August 2018. The first day was unannounced. Regency Court Care Home is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Regency Court Care Home is registered to provide nursing, care and accommodation for up to 50 people. There were 22 people living in the service when we visited. This was because two of the upper floors of the building were unoccupied. People cared for were mainly older people who were living with a range of health and care needs, including arthritis, diabetes and heart conditions. Some people were living with dementia, some of these people could show behaviours which may challenge others. Most people needed some support with their personal care, eating, drinking or mobility.

Accommodation was provided over four floors of a large town house. There were communal areas on the ground floor and a small courtyard garden to the rear. Support services like the kitchen were provided in a basement area. The service was situated close to both the main street and seafront of Littlehampton.

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 was the service’s first inspection under its current provider, HC-One Oval Limited, a national provider of care.

The two upper floors of the building were not being used, this was due to the two upper floors not being a suitable environment for people to live in. The ground and first floors, where people were accommodated, also needed some upgrading. During the inspection, both people and staff told us about their concerns about the current state of the building. After the inspection the provider sent us satisfactory information about their plans for the up-grading of the home environment.

Staff ensured the safety of people in all areas. Staff were aware of their responsibilities for safeguarding people from risk of abuse. They ensured people had any risks to them fully assessed. Where people had risks identified, care plans, which were followed by staff, were developed to reduce people’s risk.

People’s medicines were managed in a safe way and in accordance with current guidelines. There were secure facilities for the storage of medicines. The home environment was clean throughout and people were protected from risk of infection by staff who were aware of infection risk for people.

Sufficient staff were deployed on each shift. There was a stable team of staff employed, with minimal use of agency staff. Staff had been safely recruited to ensure they were suitable to provide care to people.

People commented favourably on the quality and choice of meals and drinks. Where people needed additional support with eating and drinking, this was given by staff in an appropriate way. All relevant records about people’s diet and fluids were maintained.

Staff had been supported through training, and were supervised, to ensure they had the skills they needed to meet people’s needs. Staff worked closely with relevant external professionals to ensure people were effectively supported in relation to their healthcare and other needs.

People commented on the caring nature of the staff. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity were respected. Staff also encouraged people to be as independent as they wished to be in their daily lives.

People were responded to the in the way they wanted. Care plans were developed with people, in a person-centred way. Care plans ensured people’s consent was sought in relation to their care. Where people were not able to consent to care, staff complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

Activities staff were part of the staff team and involved people in recreational activities in the way they wanted. This included helping people to access the local community as they wished and supporting more frail people on a one to one basis in their rooms.

People felt confident they could raise concerns and complaints if they wished to. They said if they did this, staff would respond in a supportive way.

People and staff were positive about the support given to them by the registered manager. Staff commented particularly on the effective teamwork in the service. Clear records were kept and regular audits took place. This meant the registered manager could review the continued quality of the service and develop action plans for improvements where indicated.