Moor Allerton Care Centre

We identified significant concerns regarding the quality and effectiveness of care documentation and governance arrangements. Risk assessments and care plans were frequently generic and lacked sufficient person-centred detail to guide staff in meeting people’s individual needs safely. This included limited information about specific health conditions and individual risks, such as the configuration of mobility equipment. Although staff demonstrated good knowledge of people and there was no evidence of widespread harm, poor documentation increased the risk of inconsistent care delivery. These issues constituted a breach of the legal regulation in relation to the governance of the service.

Further concerns were identified in relation to medicines management, assessment processes, and governance oversight. Medicines records did not always align with best practice guidance, and existing audits had failed to identify these shortcomings. Governance systems were not sufficiently robust to detect or address issues in a timely manner, and some actions identified through quality assurance processes remained outstanding. Best interests decision-making records also required improvement to ensure alignment with recognised guidance.

People generally received safe, effective, caring and responsive care from staff who knew them well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. Feedback from people, relatives and healthcare professionals was consistently positive about staff attitudes, responsiveness and the quality of working relationships. The service demonstrated a positive culture of safety, openness and learning, with lessons from incidents shared across the organisation. Staff worked effectively with healthcare partners to support people’s health needs, and there was evidence of timely access to healthcare services, safe staffing levels, good infection prevention and control practices, and a supportive management culture.

People were supported to maintain their independence, make choices about their care, and access healthcare and community services when needed. Staff understood safeguarding responsibilities, promoted people’s rights under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and supported people to live healthier lives. Relatives and professionals described staff as caring, responsive and knowledgeable about the people they supported. Information was made available in accessible formats, complaints were generally managed appropriately, and people were encouraged to provide feedback about the service.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability as their primary need for care, but the provider had regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture’.