Norcott House

The service was not able to demonstrate how they were meeting some of the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

Right support People were not always kept safe from the risk of infection and the provider took action to put things right following the first day of our inspection. Accidents and incidents were recorded, although it was not always clear what had been done to mitigate risks and reduce incidents.

We have made a recommendation the provider ensures debriefs are detailed after each incident, to help identify possible triggers and prevent a reoccurrence.

Staff were recruited safely to care for people and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were managed safely overall.

People had some involvement in planning their care and future goals, and staff used activity checklists to include in each person's support plan. Activity planners did not always fully reflect people's choices, although staff supported people with independent living skills and people chose their own activities daily. Staff were kind and patient and said they supported people in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. People had their own living areas and they were supported to engage in the community and maintain family relationships.

Right Care Care promoted people's dignity, privacy and human rights. People were supported when they wanted to eat and helped to make some choices in their day. Staff spoke with people in a respectful and caring way. Care plans and risk assessments were person centred, although some staff told us they did not always have time to read these. However, the provider showed us a signed list to show staff had stated they read and

understood people's care plans. People were mostly well safeguarded from the risk of abuse and staff understood the procedures to follow if they had any concerns. Some people told us they did not always feel safe living in the service. The management team were aware of this and tried to give reassurance. Risk assessments were in place, but not always reflective of people's needs or followed by staff.

Right culture Quality checks were not always robust enough to maintain and improve the quality and safety of the service. There were missed opportunities to identify lessons learnt when things went wrong. People and staff felt supported by the management team and felt they were approachable, although not all staff felt their views were considered.

We have made a recommendation in relation to ensuring quality checks are more robust.

Staff supported people in ways which were appropriate for their needs. However, the complexities of people's needs, and the dynamic of people living together within the service, meant at times some people did not feel safely supported.