This inspection was unannounced and took place on the 09 and 10 October 2018.

Kingfisher Court is a ‘care home’ and is registered to accommodate up to 13 people. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service is purpose built to provide specialist accommodation and rehabilitation facilities for those with acquired brain injury and associated neurological conditions. At the time of the inspection, 13 people were accommodated at the home.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe at Kingfisher Court and they were very much at the heart of the service. We received consistent positive feedback from people’s relatives and health professionals. People’s relatives felt the service went above and beyond and were extremely experienced at looking after people needs. People received excellent care that was based around their individual needs and that ensured care was personalised and responsive.

Staff enjoyed working at the home and understood the needs of people using the service and supported people in a personalised way. Staff knew people well and we saw that care was provided respectfully and sensitively, taking into account people’s different needs.

Relevant recruitment checks were conducted before staff started working at the home to make sure they were of good character and had the necessary skills. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse. There were enough staff to keep people safe.

The risks to people were minimized through risk assessments. There were plans in place for foreseeable emergencies and fire safety checks were carried out.

Activities were provided on a one to one basis by staff according to each person’s needs and interests. People were supported to have good access to the local community and were able to take part in varied activities that they enjoyed.

People received varied meals including a choice of fresh food and drinks. Staff were aware of people’s likes and dislikes and went out of their way to provide people with what they wanted.

People were cared for by a motivated and well-trained staff team. Staff received regular support and one to one sessions or supervision to discuss areas of development. They completed a wide range of training and felt it supported them in their job role. New staff completed an induction programme before being permitted to work unsupervised.

Staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and were clear that people had the right to make their own choices. Staff sought consent from people before providing care and support. The ability of people to make decisions was assessed in line with legal requirements to ensure their rights were protected and their liberty was not restricted unlawfully. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way; policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were cared for with kindness, compassion and sensitivity. Care plans provided comprehensive information about how people wished to receive care and support. This helped ensure people received personalised care in a way that met their individual needs.

Regular audits of the service were carried out to assess and monitor the quality of the service. There were appropriate management arrangements in place.