Royal Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

During our assessment of this key question, we found concerns about the quality of care which resulted in a breach of Regulation 9 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can find more details of our concerns in the evidence category findings below. People were not provided with meaningful activities, linked to hobbies and interests that the person enjoyed before coming to live at the service. The provider had not ensured choice was promoted and people received person-centred care.

This service scored 65 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

People and their relatives were actively involved in developing their care plans. However, some people's care plans needed to be more person-centred and contain details of people's life history. One relative said, "They [staff] don’t know what people have done in their life, they don’t look at a person and see what they achieved."

Staff told us there was a lack of activities at the service. The service was in the process of recruiting an activities co-ordinator.

During our two visits people were not provided with meaningful activities, linked to their hobbies and interests. Choice was not promoted at the service. We observed the breakfast and lunchtime mealtimes. Most people using the dining area remained seated in their wheelchairs during mealtimes. On both site visits there was one lunchtime meal option for people to choose from. Staff told us if people wanted something else to eat they could ask for it. This would be particularly difficult for people living with dementia. Staff did not explore meal options with people so they could make choices themselves such as pictorial menus or showing the options available.

The provider had not ensured people were provided with meaningful activities, linked to hobbies and interests that the person enjoyed before coming to live at the service. The provider had not ensured choice was promoted and people received person-centred care.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.