Holly 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. Holly Court is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 15 people with learning disabilities and other complex health needs. The home is a purpose-built building with a separate garden. There are private bedrooms with en-suite facilities, with three communal lounges, dining rooms and kitchens and three communal bathrooms. At the time of the inspection 12 people were in receipt of care from the service.

At our last inspection the service was good. At this inspection we found the service remained good and met all relevant fundamental standards. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The registered manager and staff understood how to keep people safe. There were policies and procedures to follow for concerns and staff were aware of these.

Risk assessments were in place and regularly updated to protect people from harm without restricting people’s freedom. People were supported to have maximum 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 were trained to give medicines safely, all training was monitored, and staff received regular support from the manager through supervision and appraisals.

People were involved in choosing and planning menus and supported to make healthy choices. Their nutritional intake was monitored and people were regularly weighed to make sure they were healthy.

We observed staff were caring and involved people whilst they provided support. We observed people were treated with dignity and respect.

People’s care plans contained information on what was important to them to enable staff to deliver personalised care.

The manager was visible and we saw meetings with staff were inclusive. Staff described the manager as approachable and had clear direction. Systems and processes for ensuring the quality of the service were securely and effectively in place.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The inspection of Holly Court took place on 27 October 2015 and was unannounced. Holly Court was registered with the Care Quality Commission in July 2014. This was the first inspection of the service since their registration.

Holly Court is a purpose built care home. It is part of the Holly Bank Trust which is an organisation specialising in providing education, care and support for young people and adults with profound complex needs. The home has three units providing long term care, respite care and a transitional unit supporting people with the move from children’s to adult services. On the day of our inspection, nine people were living at Holly Court.

At the time of our inspection the registered manager was not available. Another manager was employed at the home but they were not yet registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.

Relatives we spoke with told us their family member was safe.

Care and support records contained a number of individual risk assessments including photographs of equipment used by each individual to ensure it was used safely and appropriately. The home was clean and well maintained.

Staff recruitment was thorough and staff felt there were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs.

Medicines were stored and managed safely. Only staff deemed competent to administer medicines were allowed to do so.

Relatives told us staff were well trained. We saw evidence staff received training and support however, the training matrix did not evidence that all staff training was up to date.

Where people living at the home had their liberty restricted, an authorisation was in place to ensure this was lawful and their rights were protected.

People received support from staff to eat and drink in a calm and appropriate manner. Staff were caring and kind. They respected people’s right to privacy and dignity.

Relatives said they visited and made contact by telephone when they wanted. People participated in a range of activities which were planned on a monthly basis. Care plans were detailed and person centred providing information about the person’s preferences, likes and dislikes.

Staff told us it was a good organisation to work for. There was evidence of regular staff and management meetings. Regular checks and audits were completed to ensure the quality of service was regularly reviewed and where issues were identified, action plans were implemented.