The Care Quality Commission
  • Mental Health
  • Independent mental health service

Archived: The Manor Flats

The Manor Flats, Jeesal Cawston Park, Aylsham Road, Norwich, Norfolk, NR10 4JD

Provided and run by:
Jeesal Akman Care Corporation Limited

All Inspections

1, 2 May 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

At our December 2012 inspection we found that the provider was non-compliant because the care and treatment provided to patients was not always sufficiently individualised and did not take account of changes in their circumstances or condition. We also had concerns about how medicines and records were managed, patients' access to activities and community visits. The provider sent us an action plan that set out how they intended to make improvements to ensure that they achieved and maintained compliance with this standard. At this inspection we found that significant improvements had been made.

During our inspection we spoke briefly with one patient receiving care and treatment at The Manor Flats, who told us that staff supported them well and understood their needs. They also told us that the problems with their laundry experienced at the time of our last inspection had been resolved satisfactorily. We also observed effective interactions between staff and patients that were mutually respectful. Records showed that patients were receiving regular one to one support from staff.

24 January 2013

During a routine inspection

Patients received appropriate support that protected their safety and welfare and was person centred. Patients said they knew about their care plans and that they were offered a copy. However, the physical health needs of patients were not always appropriately met.

Patients told us that they routinely participated in activities that they enjoyed. One regularly visited the hospital's farm to feed the animals. Another described The Manor Flats as 'quiet and peaceful.'

Consent was appropriately sought and recorded and staff understood their responsibilities regarding consent. Patients met with an independent advocate if they wished to. One said that their advocate was 'very good'

Staff had access to appropriate training supervision and appraisal. We identified some gaps in supervision and appraisal, but the majority of staff had completed both in accordance with the provider's policies.

Patients' personal records including medical records were not always accurate and fit for purpose. Some documents were not completed or reviewed in a timely manner and some information was difficult to locate.

Patients told us that they were happy with the arrangements for administering their medicines. However, we saw evidence that there were sometimes delays in obtaining medicines. We also found that the way medicines were recorded made it difficult to be sure that some medicines had been administered as intended by the prescriber.