Osbourne Court

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At the last inspection under the previous provider, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection this key question has improved to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

People felt safe at the service. Staff knew how to recognise and report and any concerns about people’s safety and welfare.

People’s care was given in accordance with individual risks. Staff were seen working safely.

People and relatives felt there were enough trained staff to meet their needs.

Medicines and infection control were managed safely.

There was learning and actions from any incidents and accidents to help reduce the risks.

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At the last inspection under the previous provider, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection this key question has improved to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

Mealtime experience was pleasant, and people were offered snacks and drinks freely.

People’s needs were assessed prior to them moving into the service. There were regular reviews with outcomes monitored.

People were supported in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

People were supported to live healthier lives. There was effective working together to help ensure people received the right care.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At the last inspection under the previous provider, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection this key question has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

People were very positive about how they were treated with kindness and dignity.

People’s needs were responded to, and they felt they were very much so given choice and control.

There was a staff support system in place by the provider. This promoted good practice and staff who were invested in their role and also the people they supported.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At the last inspection under the previous provider, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection this key question has improved to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

People and their relatives felt care and support provided was person centred.

People’s care plans included information about support, health and social needs. People had access to services.

People and relatives were positive about the sharing of information. This included communication and listening and involving people. There were opportunities for meetings for people and relatives to attend.

People received equity in access and experiences and were given the same opportunities.

People were supported to plan for the future. End of life care plans were in place to help ensure people were supported appropriately and well at the end of their lives.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At the last inspection under the previous provider, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection this key question has improved to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

There was a new provider since our last inspection.

People, relatives and staff were extremely positive about how the service was run and the management team.

Systems were in place to drive improvement and identify any issues. Action plans were in place where needed. We found the service had significantly improved since our last inspection.

The team worked with external agencies and partners to help ensure people received good care. The management team shared their vision for the service they wanted to provide, and staff were clear on expectations and onboard with how to achieve this.