Mulberry Court Care Home

Updated 6 March 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.

Inspection team: Two inspectors 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

Mulberry Court is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and 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:

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse; and we sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We assessed the information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with 17 people who used the service and three relatives to ask about their experience of the care provided. In addition, we spoke with a visiting member of the Dementia Outreach Team and two external trainers during the inspection.

We spoke with eight members of staff including the deputy manager, nurse, administrator, two senior carer workers, two care workers and the handyperson.

We reviewed a range of records. This included six people's care records and multiple medication records. We also looked at three staff files in relation to supervision records, records relating to the management of the home and a variety of policies and procedures developed and implemented by the provider.

Updated 6 March 2019

About the service: Mulberry Court is a care home that provides personal care for up to 43 people, some of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection 39 people lived at the service. The accommodation was established over two floors. On the ground floor there were bedrooms a large dining area and a communal lounge, which was also used for delivering activities. On the second floor there were bedrooms a smaller dining area smaller lounge spaces. Access between the floors was via a lift or staircase which were secured to prevent risk of injury from fall.

People's experience of using this service:

People felt safe and staff ensured that risks to their health and safety were reduced. We found that sufficient staff were deployed to safely meet people’s needs and that staff had received training to ensure they had the knowledge to protect people from the risk of avoidable harm or abuse, whilst providing care.

People were protected from the risk of an acquired health infection, as the service employed dedicated cleaning staff to ensure the environment was clean and had appropriate policies and procedures to monitor and reduce the risk

Systems were in place to support people to take their medicines safely. Staff received relevant training and felt well supported. People were asked for their consent to their care and appropriate steps were taken to support people who lacked capacity to make decisions.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain good health.

There were positive and caring relationships between people using the service and the staff who cared for them. Staff promoted people's right to make their own decisions about their care where possible and respected the choices they made. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who understood the importance of this.

People received person-centred and responsive care from staff who had a clear understanding of their current support needs. Care plans were in place, which provided information about the care people required.

People knew how to make a complaint and there was a clear complaints procedure in place.

When people were at the end of their life the service had effective measures in place to support them and ensure their wishes and needs were met.

An open and transparent culture enabled people and staff to speak up if they wished to. The management team provided strong leadership and a clear direction to staff.

There were robust quality monitoring procedures in place. The management structure of the service was clear.

People's safety had been considered and risks had been reduced by the introduction of equipment or guidance. Staff had received training in relation to safeguarding and knew how to protect people from harm.

Information was provided in a range of formats to support understanding. People were able to access spiritual support to meet their religious beliefs.

There was a registered manager at the home and the rating was displayed at the home and on their website. When required notifications had been completed to inform us of events and incidents, this helped us the monitor the action the provider had taken.

Rating at last inspection: Requires Improvement (Published May 2017)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. At this

inspection we found the service had improved to Good, and in one area improved to Outstanding.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.