Background to this inspection
Updated
23 November 2018
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.
This unannounced inspection took place on 20 September 2018, it concluded the same day. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
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. We reviewed the PIR along with other information we held, including statutory notifications which the provider had submitted. Statutory notifications are pieces of information about important events which took place at the service, for example, safeguarding incidents, which the provider is required to send to us by law. We looked at the notifications we had received and reviewed all the intelligence CQC held to help us make a judgement about this service.
During our inspection we looked at a variety of records which, included three people’s care records, four staff files, staff’s training, supervision, appraisal and recruitment documentation. We looked at records relating to the management of the service including policies and procedures, quality assurance documents, staff rotas, complaints and compliments. We spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager, senior carer, cook and two staff. We spoke with three people living at the service and with two relatives who were visiting to gain their views. We asked the registered manager to provide us with further information following the site visit, which they provided.
Some people living at the service were living with dementia and could not tell us about their experiences. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). This is a way of observing care which, helps us understand the experiences of people who could not talk with us.
We asked the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams for their views prior to our inspection. We also contacted Healthwatch (a healthcare consumer champion) to ask if they had any feedback to share about this service.
Updated
23 November 2018
Orchard Court Residential Home 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.
Orchard Court is registered to provide care and accommodation for a maximum of 34 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. There is a house and single storey flats in the grounds. The service is situated close to Brigg town centre.
The service has a registered manager. 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.
This inspection took place on 20 September 2018, it was unannounced.
At the last inspection on 2 April 2016, the service was rated good. At this inspection, we found the service had improved to outstanding. The reasons why responsive and well-led have been rated outstanding are summarised below.
During this inspection, we found multiple examples to demonstrate the staff and management team were passionate about providing an innovative, excellent service.
High quality person-centred care and support was provided to people. Staff were extremely knowledgeable about people’s needs and they delivered high quality holistic care to people to ensure their needs were met.
Staff were extremely attentive and went the extra mile to ensure people’s lives were fulfilling and meaningful. Staff were dedicated and made sure people maintained their hobbies and interests.
People were supported by a highly motivated staff team who went out of their way to respond to people’s emotional needs.
The provider and registered manager were passionate about delivering an outstanding service to people. The providers ethos and values had been enhanced to make sure the service excelled and was inclusive of all parties. This ensured people living at the service, their relatives and staff and nurtured and involved.
Exhaustive quality assurance procedures were in place to assess the quality of the service provided and maintain people's welfare and safety.
The provider and registered manager valued the staff team immensely and supported them, they in turn, valued and supported the service. Staff went the extra mile to make sure people living at the service were supported to engage in outstanding activities to promote their social inclusion.
Individualised end of life care was promoted to a high degree at the service. The registered manager and staff came in whilst off duty to sit with people and provide support to them and their relatives during those times.
Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from harm and abuse. Accidents and incidents were monitored. Robust recruitment processes were in place. Infection control was maintained.
Staffing levels provided meet people's needs and they remained under review by the management team. Staff undertook training and supervision to maintain and develop their skills.
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 support this practice.
Staff treated people with compassion and supported them in a kind, caring way. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Advocates were available locally to help people raise their views.
People’s dietary needs were met. The food served looked appetising and nutritious. People who required monitoring of their dietary needs had this in place. Staff contacted health care professionals for help and advice if they had concerns and acted on the advice received.