Archived: Conrad Court

Updated 12 October 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by two inspectors 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.

Service and service type

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 10 people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with eight members of staff including the registered manager, the nominated individual, the regional business manager, a housing officer, a care coordinator, two domiciliary care officers, and the chef.

We reviewed a range of records including put in space10 people’s care records and five medication records. We looked at five files in relation to staff recruitment and supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate the evidence we found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We asked for feedback from four health and social care professionals but did not receive any response.

Updated 12 October 2019

About the service

Conrad Court is an extra care service which provides accommodation and personal care for people living in self-contained flats in one purpose built modern building. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 34 people with variety of care and support needs.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were protected from risk of abuse or harm. Medicines were managed safely. Not all risk assessments contained sufficient information about risks and guidance for staff. We discussed this with the registered manager and they have made the necessary improvements to the risk management plans.

People’s needs were assessed, and care plans put in place to meet these. The service worked with a range of healthcare professionals to ensure people’s health needs were met. People were supported by skilled and knowledgeable staff. Safe recruitment practices were followed.

People were positive about the kind and compassionate attitude of the staff team. Staff promoted people’s dignity and independence. People were consulted about every aspect of their care and support.

People knew how to complain if they were unhappy about their care and support. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences, but care plans did not always contain sufficient detail about people’s preferences.

People who used the service were positive about the staff and the management and felt the service supported them to live as they wanted. There were a range of systems and opportunities in place to get feedback and suggestions for improvement. The service worked with a broad range of professionals to help achieve positive outcomes for people.

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.

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 12 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 re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.