Amber Court

Updated 26 February 2019

We carried out this comprehensive 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.

Amber Court is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Before our inspection on 10 January 2019 we completed our planning tool and reviewed the information we held on the service. This included notifications we had received from the provider, about incidents that affect the health, safety and welfare of people who lived at the home and previous inspection reports. We also checked to see if any information concerning the care and welfare of people who lived at the home had been received. Prior to our inspection visit we contacted the commissioning department at the local authority and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champions for health and social care. This gave us additional information about the service.

As part of the inspection we used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is 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.

The inspection visit took place on 10 January 2019 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector and two expert by experiences. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert by experiences on this inspection had a background supporting older people and people with dementia.

Where people had limited verbal communication and were unable to converse with us, we observed staff interactions. During our inspection we used a method called Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). This involved observing staff interactions with the people in their care. SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

During the visit we spoke with a range of people about the service. They included ten people who lived at the home and five visitors. We spoke with the registered manager and six staff. We looked at the care and medicines records of three people. We reviewed a variety of records, including care plans, staff training and personnel records and records relating to the management of the home. We checked staffing levels, arrangements for meal provision and checked the building to ensure it was clean, hygienic and a safe place for people to live. We also observed care and support in communal areas. This enabled us to determine if people received the care and support they needed in an appropriate environment.

Updated 26 February 2019

Amber Court is registered as a care home with nursing and provides accommodation for people who require nursing or personal care. The home is in a residential area of Blackpool. It can accommodate a maximum of 33 people. Accommodation is over two floors with bedrooms and communal facilities on both floors with lift access. There is a car park at the front of the home.

At our last inspection in May 2016, we rated the service overall good. However safe was rated as required improvement. This was in relation to staffing. People who lived in the home, relatives and staff told us there were times when staffing was too low and staff were rushing about. We also observed this on that inspection. We made a recommendation about regularly reviewing staffing rotas to ensure safe and sufficient deployment of staff.

During this inspection visit on 10 January 2019 we found staffing was sufficient to meet the needs of people supported. We found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going 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.

At the time of the inspection 33 people lived at the home.

The inspection visit took place on 10 January 2019 and was unannounced.

There had been a change of registered manager since the last inspection. The new manager had been the registered manager for the home since July 2018. 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 they felt safe and cared for by staff. There were procedures in place to protect people from abuse and unsafe care and staff were aware of their responsibilities in keeping people safe. Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people. Any safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents were dealt with appropriately.

Medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines when needed and appropriate records had been completed.

Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs. Most people said there were sufficient staffing levels in place. One person said, “I only have to shout and they are here quickly.”

We saw and people told us staff provided care in a way that respected peoples’ dignity, privacy and independence. People told us they enjoyed a variety of social and leisure activities and staff were welcoming to their families and friends. People said this assisted their well-being.

We saw people had access to healthcare professionals. People told us staff cared for them in the way they wanted and met their care needs promptly. They referred them to healthcare professionals in a timely way.

People’s care and support had been planned with them and was person centred and informative. We saw they had consented to their care and treatment wherever possible. People had been supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and were supported in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People had information about support from an external advocate should this be required.

Most people told us they enjoyed the food provided and had choice and variety. People received sufficient food and drink and the assistance they needed. The kitchen was clean, organised and stocked with a variety of provisions and staff were trained in food safety.

We looked around the building and found it was clean and hygienic, had been maintained and was a safe place for people to live. There were safe infection control procedures and practices and staff had received infection control training. Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when providing personal care to people so they did not risk causing cross infection. The design of the building and facilities in the home were appropriate for the care and support provided. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required.

People and staff were complimentary about the management support in the home. The management team sought people's views in a variety of ways. They assessed and monitored the quality of the service through audits, resident, relative and staff meetings and surveys. People felt able to complain if they were not satisfied with their care and said action would be taken. They told us the management team were supportive and approachable.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.