Archived: Bakers Court Care Home

Updated 30 November 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

We carried out this unannounced inspection on 11, 12, 18, 19 and 22 August 2016. Two inspectors and an expert-by-experience carried out this inspection on the first day. One inspector visited on the other inspection days.

Before the inspection, we looked at the evidence we already held about the service. This included the last inspection report and notifications the provider had sent us. 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 spoke to the senior contracts officer at the local authority to find out if they were happy with the service provided to people or if they had any concerns.

During the inspection, we spoke with thirteen staff including the regional support manager, the home manager, the deputy manager, three nursing staff, three care staff, the cook, the activities co-ordinator, one of the housekeeping team and the maintenance person.

We also spoke with three visitors and eight people who used the service. We observed care and support in communal areas and used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk to us. We reviewed six care records, six staff files and records relating to the management of the service including menus, medicines, staff training, complaints and policies.

Updated 30 November 2016

Bakers Court is a residential and nursing home which provides nursing and personal care for up to 78 people. The home is spread over three floors. At the time of this inspection there were 72 people using the service. There were 31 people using the ground floor which was dedicated to people who needed nursing or residential care. The middle floor was for people who had mental health needs and there were 20 people using this service. There were 21 people using the top floor dedicated to people living with dementia. At the last inspection on 15 July 2014 the service was found to be meeting the legal requirements.

The manager in post at the time of our inspection was in the process of becoming registered. 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.

Staff knew how to report concerns or abuse. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs who were employed through safe recruitment processes. Risk assessments were carried out and management plans put in place to enable people to receive safe care. There were effective and up to date systems to check and maintain the safety of the premises. We found errors in the management of medicines however the provider had already identified this as an area of concern and had taken steps to improve this. Records showed that improvements had been achieved as a result of the provider’s actions.

Staff received support through supervisions and training opportunities. Appropriate applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been applied for and authorised. The service was working jointly with the local authority to get the authorisation of other applications. Staff obtained consent when carrying out care or treatment. People were offered a varied and nutritious food menu and had access to healthcare professionals as required to meet their day-to-day health needs.

People thought staff were caring and staff knew how to build positive relationships with people who used the service. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected and their level of independence was maintained. Each person had a named nurse and named carer who they could speak with as a first point of contact.

Staff knew the people they were supporting including their preferences to ensure a personalised service was provided. A variety of activities were offered which included trips outside the home. The service dealt with complaints in accordance with their policy and timescales.

People and staff thought the new manager was approachable and supportive. The provider held regular meetings for staff and for people and their relatives. People and their representatives were given the opportunity to complete feedback surveys. We have made a recommendation about communicating the results of these surveys to interested parties. The provider had quality assurance systems in place to identify areas for improvement and had brought in extra support to enable improvements to take place.