Archived: ACASA

Updated 25 July 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 checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, looked at the overall quality of the service, and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. A service provider is the legal organisation responsible for carrying on the adult social care services we regulate.

This announced inspection of Newman Court took place on 8 and 11 June 2018 and was carried out by one inspector. The inspection was announced, which meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting. We announced the inspection to ensure that people we needed to speak with would be available.

When planning the inspection visit we took account of the size of the service and that some people using the service could find unfamiliar visitors unsettling. As a result this inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). 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 reviewed the information included in the PIR along with information we held about the service, for example, statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. We also reviewed information contained within the provider’s website.

During our inspection we spoke with four people living at Newman Court and two visiting relatives. We used a range of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service who were not always able to tell us about their experience. These included observations and pathway tracking. Pathway tracking is a process which enables us to look in detail at the care received by an individual using the service. We pathway tracked the care and support of five people.

Throughout the inspection we observed how staff interacted and cared for people across the course of the day, including mealtimes and when medicines were administered. During the inspection we spoke with nine people who were using the service, three relatives and three health and social care professionals. We also spoke with the registered manager, the operations manager, the area manager, one team leader and nine staff.

We reviewed ten people’s care records, which included their daily notes, care plans and medicine administration records (MARs). We looked at nine staff recruitment, supervision and training files. We examined the provider’s records which demonstrated how people’s care reviews, staff supervisions, appraisals and required training were arranged.

We also looked at the provider’s policies and procedures and other records relating to the management of the service, such as staff rotas covering May and June 2018, health and safety audits, medicine management audits, infection control audits, contingency plans and minutes of staff meetings. We considered how people’s and staff feedback were used to drive improvements in the service.

This was the first inspection of this service.

Updated 25 July 2018

This comprehensive inspection took place on 8 and 11 June 2018 and the service was rated 'Good' overall.

Newman Court 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. At Newman Court this accommodation consists of individual flats in one complex, which have been rented by individuals and is their 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 provided by the service. Not everyone living at Newman Court received regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of inspection the service was supporting 25 people with personal care.

The service had a registered manager in place 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were kept safe from harm by staff who knew what to do in order to maintain their safety and protect them from abuse. People were consulted about risks relating to their safety, how they were managed and how their independence could be promoted. Risks to people were assessed and action was taken to minimise any avoidable harm.

Staff supported people to maintain high standards of cleanliness and hygiene in their homes, and to safely manage the control and prevention of infection, particularly in relation to the safe preparation of food.

Staff underwent appropriate training to support people to manage their medicines safely and had their competency to do so regularly assessed.

The provider applied thorough recruitment procedures to ensure staff were suitable to support people made vulnerable by circumstances living in their own home. The registered manager completed rotas which ensured that enough suitably qualified staff, with the right skills mix, were deployed to provide care and support to meet people’s needs safely.

Staff raised concerns with regard to safety incidents, concerns and near misses. The registered manager analysed incidents and accidents to identify trends and implement measures to prevent a further occurrence. When mistakes happened the provider responded in an open and transparent manner, apologising to people where necessary, and taking prompt action to put things right.

The provider had enabled staff to develop and maintain the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs effectively. People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their nutritional needs.

Staff supported people to maintain their health and ensured they were referred promptly to appropriate healthcare professionals whenever their needs changed.

The registered manager and staff clearly understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were involved in making every day decisions and choices about how they wanted to live their lives.

People's independence was promoted by staff who encouraged them to do as much for themselves as possible. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and were sensitive to their needs regarding equality, diversity and their human rights.

People experienced good continuity and consistency of care from staff who were kind and compassionate. People were relaxed and comfortable in the presence of staff who invested time to develop meaningful relationships with them.

The service was responsive and involved people in developing their support plans which were detailed and personalised to ensure their individual preferences were known. People were supported to complete stimulating activities of their choice, which had a positive impact on their well-being. People were supported by staff to maintain special relationships with friends and relatives to protect them from the risks associated with social isolation.

Opportunities were available for people and their families to regularly contribute to the development of the service and to help drive continuous improvement. The service had a structured approach to obtaining feedback from people using the service, including satisfaction surveys and quality assurance visits.

The service was well managed and well-led by the registered manager who provided clear and direct leadership, which inspired staff to provide good quality care. The provider ensured the service delivered high quality care by completing regular audits, site visits and reviewing the registered manager's monitoring reports, which detailed all significant events. The safety and quality of support people received was effectively monitored and identified shortfalls were acted upon to drive continuous improvement of the service. The area and operations managers were very approachable and listened to staff feedback which made staff feel valued.