Henlow Court provides nursing, residential and respite care for up to 40 people, some of whom have a diagnosis of dementia. At the time of our inspection 38 people were living there. The home is purpose built over two floors and has lounges and dining rooms on both floors.

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

People were protected against the risks of potential abuse and they told us they felt safe in the home. Staff knew about safeguarding people and reported any concerns. Individual risks for people were minimised and risk assessments of the environment were completed to help ensure people lived in a safe home. There were sufficient staff who were recruited using thorough checks to ensure their suitability. Medicines were managed safely and reviewed. People were able to make their own choices and decisions about their care. They 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 supported this practice. People’s needs were met by staff who had access to the training they needed and had regular updates to their training. Staff were supported in their role and had regular individual meetings where they could discuss their training and their progress with senior staff. People had a choice of meals and their nutritional needs were met. People told us they liked the meals provided.

People had positive interactions with staff who respected their privacy and dignity. We observed staff were kind and compassionate to people and encouraged them to be independent. People

received personalised care and had care plans that identified their needs and they were reviewed regularly. People were supported by health and social care professionals who visited when required. There was a programme of activities and links with the local community were established. There was a clear complaints procedure and people could use the suggestion box in the home.

The registered provider had quality assurance procedures to check the service was safe and people were supported to lead the life they wanted without restrictions. People and their supporters had opportunities to comment on the service and they were listened to. Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and were able to comment to help improve the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

People who lived at Henlow Court told us they enjoyed living there and they were well cared for. They told us that they were able to make choices about how they lived their lives. There was information recorded for each person which described their likes and dislikes and how they would like to be supported. For those people who lacked the capacity to make decisions there was evidence that people who were close to them had been consulted about important decisions and the provider had acted in accordance with their wishes.

People's needs, including risks to their health and wellbeing, had been properly assessed and kept under review. Care plans were person centred and reflected people's life styles and preferences. The standard of record keeping had improved and provided evidence that people's needs were consistently met.

There were systems in place to prevent and control infection. The home was well maintained, clean and tidy, although we noticed a lingering smell of urine in some people's bedrooms.

There were effective recruitment and selection procedures in place so people could be assured that they were cared for by appropriately skilled and qualified staff.

This unannounced inspection took place on 11 and 12 December 2014.

Henlow court provides nursing, residential and respite care for up to 40 people, some of whom have a diagnosis of dementia. At the time of our inspection 37 people were living there. The home is purpose built over two floors and has lounge and dining rooms on both floors.

There was 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.

All staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to recognise abuse and what action to take to protect people from harm. Risk assessments were completed to minimise risks to people’s health and welfare. People were supported by sufficient staff with the appropriate skills, experience and knowledge to meet their needs. Recruitment procedures used ensured suitable staff were appointed. Not all accidents were recorded so that preventative measures for people were looked into. We made a recommendation for the service to take appropriate steps to ensure that people are not put at unnecessary risk.

People were cared for by appropriately trained and supported staff. People had a choice of food and their dietary needs were met. Where people were at risk of malnutrition steps were taken to monitor and improve nutrition to meet their requirements. Arrangements were in place for people to see their GP regularly and other healthcare professionals when they needed them. People were supported to make decisions. There was insufficient information to ensure the MCA regulations had been met. As a result people’s rights may not always be protected. We made a recommendation for the service to regard best practice to protect people in respect of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. (MCA).

People told us they were well cared for and enjoyed the company of the staff. People were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was protected. We observed staff offering people choices and gaining their consent for care. People’s needs were met because the staff treated them as individuals and knew what they liked.

People were asked their views about their care and how the home was run. Concerns were listened to at residents meetings, where all aspects of the service was discussed. People told us staff listened to what they had to say and improvements were made. Regular checks were made to ensure the service was safe and well maintained.