Background to this inspection
Updated
21 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 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.
This comprehensive inspection took place on 5 June 2018 and was announced.
We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service for adults who may be out during the day. We needed to be sure that they would be in.
The inspection team was made up of two adult social care inspectors.
Prior to the inspection we looked at all the information we held about the service including notifications. Notifications are a legal requirement and give CQC information about important events that have taken place at the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually, to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make. We also contacted the quality monitoring team at North Yorkshire County Council to ask for their feedback.
During the inspection, we spoke with five people who used the service, two relatives, two senior care workers and the registered manager. There was a second registered manager providing support during the inspection who we spoke to in order to request information only.
We visited people in their apartments and inspected records that were kept there with people’s permission. We reviewed three people’s care plans including risk assessments, medicine administration records (MARs), We looked at three staff recruitment files, supervision and training records. We also looked at records associated with the running of the service such as care staff observations, meeting minutes, policies and procedures.
Following the inspection we contacted several health and social care professionals for feedback about the service.
Updated
21 July 2018
Plaxton Court is an extra care housing service, which also has a domiciliary care service registered with CQC to provide personal care. The service provides domiciliary care to ten older people. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented and is the occupant’s 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] service. The service is part of the Joseph Rowntree Trust, which is a charitable organisation.
At our last inspection in October 2015, we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
There were safeguarding procedures in place. Staff were knowledgeable about what action they should take if abuse was suspected.
Recruitment checks were robust. They had been carried out to assist the registered manager in making recruitment decisions and to ensure that people were kept as safe as possible. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Records confirmed that training had been completed to ensure staff were suitably skilled. Staff were supported though an appraisal and supervision system.
People's nutritional needs were met and they were supported to access healthcare services when required.
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.
We observed positive interactions between staff and people who lived at the service. Staff promoted people's privacy and dignity. There were systems in place to ensure people were involved in their care and support.
Care plans were in place, which detailed people’s individual care and support needs. These included social and spiritual needs through a programme of activities as part of the extra care housing.
There was a complaints procedure in place, which was followed by the service when dealing with issues raised by people.
Audits and checks were carried out to monitor all aspects of the service and action plans were developed to highlight any areas, which required improvement. Staff said they enjoyed working with people at the service. We observed that they applied this positivity in their roles when supporting people.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.