We carried out a review of the data available to us about Mary Jones 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 Mary Jones Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Mary Jones Court is a supported living service which provides personal care and other support to people with a learning disability. People live in their own flats within a purpose-built building which consists of 20 self-contained flats, a communal area for social events and a staff office. The Care Quality Commission only inspects where people are receiving the regulated activity of personal care. This is help related to personal care and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection two people were receiving personal care.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcome for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People’s support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they were happy living at the service and felt safe. Staff knew people well and understood how to promote their safety and protect them from the risk of abuse.
People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff, who were safely recruited to work at the service.
People were consulted by staff about their wishes, interests and preferences. This information was used to develop person-centred care plans to enable people to live as independently as possible. These plans were regularly reviewed and contained guidance for staff to protect people from risks related to their personal care, health and their home environment.
People received support with their medicines, in line with their assessed needs. People accessed health care services with staff support.
People received their care and support from kind and thoughtful staff. This included support to access community amenities and services, and take part in activities arranged by the staff team. Staff provided care and support in a respectful and dignified way.
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 were provided with information about how to make a complaint and any complaints were dealt with in a professional manner.
People were encouraged to contribute their views about their care and support. They could take part in aspects of the running of the service if they wished to.
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 26 June 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information and intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection guidelines. We may inspect sooner if any concerning information is received.
At the last inspection in July 2014, with the inspection report being published in January 2015, the service was rated as ‘Good’. At this inspection we found that the service continued to be ‘Good’.
People’s risks were managed and care plans contained appropriate and detailed risk management plans with input from health and social care professionals, which were updated regularly when people’s needs changed.
People who required support with their medicines received them safely from staff who had completed training in the safe handling and administration of medicines. Staff completed appropriate records when they administered medicines and these were checked by staff and audited monthly to minimise medicines errors.
People were supported to have a healthy and balanced diet, which took into account their preferences as well as medical and nutritional needs.
Staff received the training and supervision they needed to meet people’s needs and were knowledgeable about their jobs.
People had regular access to healthcare services and other health and social care professionals, such as GPs, dentists and dietitians.
People were involved in planning how they were cared for and supported. Care records were person centred and developed to meet people’s individual needs and discussed regularly during weekly key work sessions.
People and their relatives where applicable, were informed about their health and well-being and were actively involved in decisions about their care and support, in accordance with people’s own wishes.
We saw that staff treated people with respect and kindness, respected their privacy and promoted their dignity and independence.
There was an accessible complaints procedure in place and people and their relatives knew how to make a complaint and were able to share their views and opinions about the service. There was a survey in place and monthly tenants meetings to allow people the opportunity to feedback about the care and support they received.
There were effective quality assurance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and understand the experiences of people who used the service. Information obtained was used to identify ways to make improvements.
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 was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service. This inspection was unannounced.
The service provides care and support to people living in their own flats. Mary Jones Court consists of 20 self-contained flats. Three people living at Mary Jones Court received support with personal care from staff. The service specialises in providing care to people who have learning disabilities.
The last inspection was carried out in May 2014 and at this time all areas we reviewed were met.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law, as does the provider.
Staff had a good understanding of how to identify abuse, and knew how to respond appropriately to any concerns to keep people safe. Staff at Mary Jones Court were meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005.
Recruitment procedures were in place to ensure that only people who were deemed suitable worked within the service. There was an induction programme for new staff which prepared them for their role. Staff were provided with a range of training to help them to carry out their roles effectively. They received regular supervision meetings with their manager and had annual appraisals to support them to meet people’s needs. There were enough staff employed by the service to meet people’s needs.
People had care plans in place which reflected their assessed needs. People were supported effectively with their health needs and were involved in making decisions about what kind of support they wanted.
Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and cared for them according to their individual needs. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences and we saw positive interactions between staff and people living at Mary Jones Court on the day of our inspection. People were encouraged to be involved in the running of the organisation and incentives were provided to encourage this.
People using the service, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback on the service. They knew how to make complaints and there was an effective complaints management system in place.
The service carried out regular audits to monitor the quality of the service and to plan improvements. Where shortfalls were identified action plans were put in place to rectify these.
People told us they felt safe living in the service and felt that staff were well trained and knowledgeable. One person said, 'they know the support I need and can tell when I need support.'
Staff we spoke with received appropriate development and training and told us they were supported to carry out their role.
People chose to do what they wanted, when they wanted to do it and people gave us lots of examples of this. One person said: "They take me out shopping. I get my money. I go on day trips and on holiday. I am choosing a hotel on the Isle of Wight."
People said that they were involved in planning their care and had access to their records.
People knew how to make a complaint and get support with this if they needed it. We saw evidence that people's complaints had been listened to, investigated and acted upon. People were able to feedback their views about the service at tenant's meetings, through surveys or by raising any issues with their key-worker.