We carried out a review of the data available to us about Netley Court on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Netley Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Netley Court is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 70 people. The service provides support to older people, people with physical disabilities or sensory impairments and people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 51 people using the service. Netley Court is a three floor, purpose-built care home. Specialist dementia care was provided on the upper floor; however, this was being refurbished when we inspected and residents who usually resided there had been moved to the other two floors.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relatives believed the service was safe and staff participated in regular training to maintain skills and knowledge in areas such as safeguarding. Risks were assessed and equipment in the premises was checked and serviced as required. Recruitment was safely completed. Staff members told us they believed there were not always sufficient staff deployed to meet peoples’ needs, however, a dependency tool used by the provider showed staffing in line with recent calculations. Medicines were safely stored and administered. The premises were clean and we were assured the provider had effective IPC practices.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People and relatives were positive about the care received from staff. Staff members, however, felt they had insufficient time to spend with people or to read information and care plans. Staff were respectful in their interactions with people and supported them to make decisions about care. Staff were discreet when approaching people to support them with their care and spoke kindly about people.
The management team and senior managers had strived to develop a positive culture within the staff team but had not been successful. Staff did not feel fully supported by the management team and felt they were not available to them. People were also not very familiar with the management team. People, relatives and staff were engaged through questionnaires and meetings. The provider had forged positive relationships with health and social care professionals they worked with.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Outstanding (published 26 March 2020).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
The overall rating for the service has changed from outstanding to good based on the findings of this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Netley Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Measures were in place and clearly communicated to prevent relatives, friends, professionals and others visiting from spreading infection at the entrance and on entering the premises. Automated entrance doors had been fitted to reduce touch point areas, along with an automated sanitising station at the entrance. Before entry, visitors were required to answer a set of questions and their temperatures were taken using a digital thermometer. An electronic signing in system had replaced the previous paper-based system.
Visitors were provided with personal protective equipment (PPE) and visits took place in a designated visitor’s room which included Perspex partitions and separate entrance and exit areas. Alternative arrangements to visiting in person included the use of hand-held devices to accommodate skype or zoom calls and telephone and email communications were also facilitated and supported.
Socially distanced group activities had taken place based on risk assessments of day to day events and the provider had implemented changes to ensure people’s social, spiritual and emotional needs continued to be met. This had included church services via YouTube, virtual pantomimes and music concerts. When weather permitted, the service had arranged external singers and entertainers in the grounds, following social distance guidance.
The provider reviewed and amended their admissions procedure in line with government guidance. New residents were required to have a negative COVID-19 test result prior to moving in, along with a 14-day settling in period that included restricted access to parts of the building. For those who were unable to self-isolate due to cognitive impairment a designated isolation suite was identified.
The provider had considered the impact on people of staff having to wear facemasks. Where appropriate, care plans included guidance about how staff could most effectively communicate and meet people’s needs. The provider had also considered people’s rights to consent to COVID testing and, where appropriate, decision specific mental capacity assessments were completed in line with the Mental Capacity Act.
In addition to the standard infection control training, COVID-19 specific training had been provided and handwashing competency assessments completed to ensure staff had the required knowledge. Also, a presentation and quiz had been created to further ensure staff competencies. Specific areas had been arranged for staff to change into their uniforms before starting their shifts and there were new procedures for the washing of uniforms to be undertaken in-house.
The provider had conducted one to one staff wellbeing meetings that focused on each individual and any difficulties they and their loved ones were experiencing during the pandemic. Support had included hardship grants and food parcels. The annual team awards ceremony had been held virtually as it was felt important to give recognition to staff.
The provider had reviewed how they obtain feedback from people, particularly in relation to COVID-19. This had included amending the questions asked in annual satisfaction surveys. Weekly emails to relatives had been introduced, which had improved communication.
During the early days of the pandemic the provider had been proactive in introducing twice daily temperature checks and oxygen saturation levels for people using the service. The provider had implemented an Infection Prevention team where representatives from all the support functions met virtually to discuss COVID-19, each care home and any support required. Regular virtual meetings with the home managers had taken place to cascade changes in guidance and practice. The provider had also set up a specific email address for managers and other staff to raise queries. As a result of the CQC ‘Closed Culture’ guidance the provider had reviewed their whistleblowing procedures and outsourced this in order to continue to promote safe care.
Netley Court is a residential care home providing personal care to 65 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 70 people.
The care home is purpose built and accommodation is over three floors with access via stairs and passenger lifts. The upper floor of the home provides a service for people who are living with advanced dementias. The accommodation is fully accessible and in very good decorative order. A refurbishment of some areas has taken place and in 2020 a new conservatory will be added along with a roof terrace to provide outside space from the first floor with views of the Southampton Waters.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The service provided people with outstanding care and support and enabled them to live fulfilling lives. People were consistently at the heart of the service. We received extensive positive feedback about the service provided and staff. We saw that the home played a significant part in the local community.
The service was safe. People were supported by staff with training in safeguarding and who were prepared to whistle-blow should they witness poor care. The premises were very well managed and maintained. Checks to equipment and systems went over and above those required by law or the provider. Staff were safely recruited, and additional general assistants had been appointed to reduce pressure on care teams. Medicines were effectively managed using an electronic record system. The home was very clean and there were no malodours.
The service was effective. People had pre-admission assessments which were shared with staff before they were admitted so that staff could be prepared and provide a person centred welcome. Staff received beneficial supervision and benefitted from an extensive training programme that included numerous opportunities to achieve qualifications. New staff had a named person to link with for the duration of their probation and shadowed experienced staff for two weeks before working independently, if ready to do so. Nutrition was recognised to be essential to the health and well-being of people and the catering team had worn various awards due to the quality of the food they provided. Specialist diets such as soft meals were exceptionally well catered for. Links to healthcare professionals were excellent with a service level agreement with the GP surgery and district nurses attending sometimes multiple times each day. The premises were particularly well presented and were undergoing improvements to the décor and adding areas such as a conservatory, a private dining room and updating reminiscence areas to broaden their appeal.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People and their relatives told us that staff were exceptionally caring and we saw numerous positive interactions. Staff knew people well and could support them effectively should they become anxious and in communicating choices for example. Staff were seen to be respectful both of people living in the service and of each other and supported people in a person-centred way. The care provided was an exceptionally high quality and people were valued members of the home.
Care plan reviews took place each month and people participated as fully as they were able. Staff used different approaches to get feedback from people. The provider was able to support the provision of information in multiple different formats and ensured that people received information in the most appropriate format. There was an extensive activities programme, and people received one-to-one support should they choose not to attend the group sessions. Regular sessions such as exercise and a ‘Daily Happy Hour’ in the bar were in place, which gave structure to the day. There were few recorded complaints and people and their relatives were confident should they have a complaint that it would be dealt with promptly and to their satisfaction. End of life care had been developed since our last inspection with several staff attending the ‘Six Steps to Success’ training programme. This had enabled staff to cascade the good practice to colleagues thus improving the experience for everyone.
The registered manager and their management team were passionate about providing quality care to people and reflected the visions and values of the service in their day-to-day practice, inspiring their staff to support people to achieve positive outcomes. The manager was open and honest and if something went wrong did not hesitate to be candid with people and their relatives. The governance system was effective and firmly embedded into practice. Linked to the electronic care record, it gave a broad overview of the service enabling continual improvements to be made. The registered manager was a mentor to colleagues and an ambassador for the electronic care record, providing bespoke training to Netley Court staff and other services in the provider group. The registered manager had forged multiple links to the community and the service welcomed members of the public in for events and activities as well as providing a base for the dementia action group for example. Links were also in place due to providing an AED for use by both the service and the community and inviting community-based professionals such as the police and nurses to the home for refreshments and a safe place to use facilities.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 29 July 2017).
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Netley Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Netley Court is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide care for up to 65 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. There were 51 people using the service at the time of our inspection. The home is situated on the Solent and has pleasant views across the estuary. It is close to public amenities and local shops. The accommodation is over three floors with the top floor being a dedicated dementia service.
The home had a registered manager in place. 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 told us that they felt safe. Staff knew how to safeguard people from potential abuse and how to raise any concerns appropriately.
People's individual risks were assessed and managed safely. Where risks had been identified these had been minimised to protect people's health and welfare.
Staff were recruited safely and there were enough staff deployed to meet the care and support needs of the people living in the home.
Appropriate arrangements were in place to ensure people's medicines were obtained, stored and administered safely.
The registered manager and the staff team were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People had access to health professionals to maintain their health and well-being. Where people required assistance with their dietary needs there were systems in place to provide this support safely.
Staff had received an induction into the service. The provider had provided staff with appropriate training and support through regular supervisions and annual appraisals.
People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff listened to people and acted on what they said.
People were looked after by kind and caring staff who knew them well. People were treated with dignity and respect.
Staff told us the registered manager demonstrated strong and supportive leadership. The culture of the service was open, transparent and progressive based on good team work.
Complaints policies and procedures were in place and were available to people and visitors. People told us they were confident that they could raise concerns or complaints and that these would be dealt with appropriately.
The service had a quality assurance system in place that clearly reviewed the quality of the service and drove service improvements.