Forrester Court

“This location is run by 2 companies. These 2 companies have a dual registration and are jointly responsible for the services at the home. The last rating for this service was ‘Good’ (report published 14 April 2018). We carried out this assessment because of the length of time since the last inspection. We looked at all the quality statements and the overall rating for this service remains good.”

“We identified some shortfalls with the management and administration of medicines. However, the registered manager took prompt action to rectify these issues during our assessment. People received a safe service, were protected from abuse or neglect and had their human rights promoted. Robust recruitment procedures were followed. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. Risks to people were assessed and their safety was monitored and managed., People were supported in the least restrictive way. Accidents and incidents were monitored and analysed, so lessons could be learned and recurrences avoided. Staff followed effective infection control procedures.”

“People had their needs assessed and care plans were compiled to meet their individual requirements. People were supported to live healthy and safe lifestyles and had full support to access healthcare professionals, as needed. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act and made sure people consented to their care and support. People were supported in the least restrictive way possible and had maximum choice and control of their lives.”

“Care plans were regularly reviewed and kept up to date. Managers carried out regular audits. People were supported to make a complaint if needed and they were listened to and responded to appropriately. Information from complaints, comments or concerns was used to help drive improvement.”

“People received a personalised service and were fully involved in all aspects of their care and support. Staff worked with people in accordance with their care plans, but also made sure people were encouraged to do as much for themselves as possible. Information was accessible and available to people in a format suitable for their communication needs. Equality and diversity was consistently promoted and respected for everyone.”