Penrose Court

Updated 19 November 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by an inspector, an assistant 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.

Service and service type

Penrose Court 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, both were looked at during this inspection.

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

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since it was registered with CQC. This included information sent to us by the provider or shared with us by the local authority. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with seven people, three relatives and eight staff including one care staff, one senior care staff, an agency care worker, a member of the housekeeping staff, the chef, the activities coordinator, the clinical lead, and the registered manager. We observed how staff supported people in communal areas of the service.

We reviewed a range of records. This included care records for three people and multiple medicines records. We looked at three staff files to review the provider’s recruitment, training and staff supervision processes. We also looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures, audits and surveys.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at further quality assurance records, staff numbers and activities provided to support people to pursue their hobbies and interests. We received feedback from a representative of the local authority.

Updated 19 November 2019

About the service:

Penrose Court is a care home registered to provide nursing and personal care for up to 65 people. This is a purpose-built service which was opened in October 2018. The service consists of three floors, with each floor accommodating people with specific care needs, such as dementia and nursing care. There are facilities like a salon, cinema, pub and café for people to use. At the time of the inspection, 17 people were living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

People said they were supported by kind and caring staff who met their care and support needs. However, staff did not always have access to care plans and information about people to enable them to provide consistently safe, effective and personalised care. Staff were not always deployed well within the service to ensure people always received timely support. People needed more support to pursue their hobbies and interests.

People were protected from harm by staff who were trained to identify and report concerns. People were safe because potential risks to their health and wellbeing had been managed well. There were enough staff to support people safely. People were supported to take their medicines. Lessons were learnt from incidents to prevent recurrence. Staff followed processes to prevent the spread of infections.

Staff had been trained to meet people's needs. They had the information to meet people’s assessed needs, but said they needed more training to meet the needs of people with complex mental health needs. People had been supported to have enough to eat and drink. People had access to healthcare services when required, and this helped them to maintain their health and well-being.

Staff were respectful in how they interacted with people and supported them. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The provider had systems to assess and monitor the quality of the service. The registered manager and staff were motivated to provide the best service they could for people and their relatives. They were keen to learn and take steps to further improve the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Rating at last inspection:

This service was registered with us on 08/10/2018 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the registration date.

Enforcement:

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Safe, Responsive and Well-led sections of this full report. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up:

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.