Archived: Amber Court

Updated 21 June 2017

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.

We carried out this announced inspection on 20 and 23 March 2017. The provider was given 24 hours’ notice of this inspection because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in. Two inspectors carried out this inspection on the first day and one inspector visited the second day.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the evidence we already held about the service. This included the last inspection report and notifications the provider had sent us. We also contacted the local authority to obtain their views about the service.

During the inspection, we spoke with the registered manager, the general manager, the deputy manager, a care co-ordinator, the activities co-ordinator and three care workers. We reviewed seven care records, six staff files and records including medicines, staff training, complaints, policies and quality assurance. We also spoke with seven people who used the service and following the inspection we spoke with a relative.

Updated 21 June 2017

Genesis Housing Association Limited provides a supported living service to people with learning disabilities, physical disabilities, mental health issues and dementia. At the time of this inspection people living in 53 of the flats needed support with personal care. The building is purpose built and consists of 65 flats including four respite flats across nine floors. There is also a communal area with a homely feel which encourages people to spend time there to socialise. There is a café which has a large dining area and a smaller television area allowing people to watch television, play games or chat with each other.

At the last inspection in October 2014, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

We found staff knew how to report concerns or abuse. There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs who were employed through safe recruitment processes. Risk assessments were carried out and management plans put in place to enable people to receive safe care. Medicines were managed safely.

Staff received support through supervisions and training opportunities. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service support this practice. Staff knew when they needed to obtain people’s consent. People were supported to eat a nutritionally balanced diet and had access to healthcare professionals as required to meet their day-to-day health needs.

Some people thought staff were kind and caring. Other people thought staff were focussed on completing tasks. The provider was working on staff attitudes in supervisions and team meetings. Staff were knowledgeable about respecting people’s privacy and dignity and maintain people’s independence.

Staff knew the people they were supporting including their preferences. A variety of activities were offered which included building life skills. Complaints were investigated and resolved in accordance with the service’s policy and procedures. The service kept a record of compliments.

There was a registered manager at the service. Staff spoke positively about the management team. People and their families were asked to give feedback on the service. The provider had regular meetings with staff and tenants. The service had various quality assurance systems and issues identified were used to improve the quality of service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.