Jubilee Court

Updated 19 March 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was undertaken by two inspectors, and a specialist advisor on 20 January 2020. The specialist advisor was a nursing professional. One inspector returned on the 22 January 2020 to complete the inspection.

Service and service type

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

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection-

We spoke with six people who used the service and four relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with visiting social care and health care professionals, one nurse, one senior, six support staff, the cook, two activities staff, physiotherapist, and physiotherapy assistant, occupational therapist, clinical lead nurse and the registered manager. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of documents and records including sampling the care records for eight people, 29 medicine records, three staff files and training records. We looked at the registration status for all of the nurses working in the home. We also looked at records that related to the management and quality assurance of the service.

Updated 19 March 2020

About the service

Jubilee Court is a purpose-built residential care home providing rehabilitation, personal and nursing care to 30 people who have an acquired brain injury. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 30 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Systems required improvement to ensure robust recruitment practices were followed and the registration status of nurses needed to be continually monitored to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Medicines practices were inconsistent as we found gaps in records and some medicines had not been dated when opened. Action was taken to address all of these shortfalls during the inspection.

People told us they felt safe. Staff knew how to escalate concerns and were aware of potential risks when providing support. People received their medicines when they needed them. Staff wore gloves and aprons to ensure they protected people from cross infection. Systems were in place to learn lessons from incidents and accidents and from any other events in the home to make improvements.

Staff had the training they needed to fulfil their role and support people effectively. People’s healthcare needs were monitored and met, and staff worked in partnership with healthcare and social care professionals in addition to the on-site therapist team. People, as much as practicably possible, had choice and control of their lives and staff were aware of how to support them in the least restrictive way and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People and relatives made positive comments about the caring, supportive and dedicated approach of the staff and therapist team that supported them. People were encouraged to be independent, had their privacy respected and were treated with dignity and respect. People were supported to participant in meaningful activities of their choice.

People were consulted in all aspects of their care and rehabilitation pathway. Support plans provided staff with information about people’s needs and preferences and how they would like these to be met. People had individualised rehabilitation plans which were regularly reviewed monitoring peoples progress to reach their potential. People knew how to raise concerns and felt confident these would be addressed.

People, relatives and staff thought the service was managed well. The registered manager was described as open, and approachable in the way they managed the service. Systems were in place to monitor the delivery of the service.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 15 August 2018).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about the care people were receiving and the lack of professionalism of the staff and manager. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from these concerns.

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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk