All inspections: Royal Mencap Society - Ashfield Court Care Home

This inspection took place on 12 November 2014 and was unannounced. There were no breaches of legal requirements at our previous inspection on 18 September 2013.

Royal Mencap Society is registered to provide accommodation and care at Ashfield Court Care Home for up to 24 people with learning disabilities. Accommodation is arranged in four bungalows that each have six bedrooms and an additional bungalow is used for administration and activities. There were 24 people there when we visited.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We found that people felt they were safely cared for by staff who knew what action to take to keep everyone safe. The provider used safe systems when new staff were recruited and people living at the service were involved in selecting new staff. All risks to safety were minimised and medicines were well managed to make sure people received them safely as prescribed.

Staff received regular training and knew how to meet people’s individual needs. Any important changes in people’s needs were passed on to all staff when they started their shifts, so that they all knew the up to date information.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find in care homes. DoLS is a code of practice to supplement the main MCA 2005 code of practice. Providers are required to submit applications to a ‘Supervisory Body’ for authority to make decisions about depriving people of their liberty, so that they get the care and treatment they need. We found the staff were knowledgeable about these and safeguards were appropriately in place where needed. Staff gained consent from people whenever they could and where people lacked capacity in some areas we saw that arrangements were in place for staff to act in their best interests.

We saw that people had appropriate food and drink and staff supported them individually, so that their health needs were met.

Staff were kind to people and cared about them. We saw that choices were given to people at all times. We found people’s privacy and dignity were respected and all confidential information was respectfully held securely.

Staff understood how to manage people’s individual needs and assisted people to take part in appropriate daily individual activities at home and in the community.

Prior to our inspection we reviewed all the information we had received from the provider. We spoke with three people who used the service and three relatives for their views. The registered manager was not available on the day of the inspection but we spoke with them by telephone after the visit. We spoke with seven members of staff including two house managers. We also looked at service information, support plan files for four people and did a tour of the buildings.

People we spoke told us they were involved in discussions and decisions about the care and support they received. Comments included, 'I have meetings with my keyworker and we have 'residents' meetings where we talk about holidays and activities, we've just planned a Halloween party.'

Relatives we spoke with told us they were confident their relative was protected from abuse and were well cared for. Comments received included, 'I can't sing their (staff) praises enough.'

We found there were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people's needs and they were deployed appropriately. Staff were well supported and received relevant training to enable them to do their job competently and efficiently.

People who used the service, their representatives and others were asked for their views about their care and support and they were acted on.

As part of our inspection we spoke with two people who used the service, three relatives and a visiting professional. We also spoke with the acting manager, a regional operations manager and four staff.

On the day of our inspection there were 24 people living at Ashfield Court Care Home. We used observation as well as talking with people to help us understand the experiences of people using the service, because many of the people living at Ashfield Court had complex needs which meant they were not all able to tell us their experiences.

Comments included, 'I like living here, the staff are nice.' And 'I can talk to my keyworker if I have any worries.' And, 'The staff support us to go out on trips, I've been on holiday this year.'

On the day of our inspection two people were on holiday supported by two members of staff. Some people had gone out with staff for a pub lunch, another person was supported to cook their own lunch and someone else was supported to attend a doctors appointment.

We spoke with three relatives who all spoke positively about the support their relatives received. Comments included, 'The staff are excellent, there has been some recent staff changes but on the whole the staff group are consistent.' And, 'Communication is good, I'm involved in reviews of care plans and risk assessments, I know what's going on.'

Archived: Royal Mencap Society - Ashfield Court Care Home Also known as Ashfield Court Care Home

All Inspections

12 November 2014

During a routine inspection

10 October 2013

During a routine inspection

5 September 2012

During a routine inspection