- Care home
Aarons Specialist Unit
Report from 13 June 2024 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
We carried out our on-site assessment on 26 June 2024, off site assessment activity started on 12 June 2024 and ended on 13 July 2024. We looked at 21 quality statements and 51 evidence categories relating to; Learning culture, Safe systems, pathways and transitions, Safeguarding, Involving people to manage risks, Safe environments, Safe and effective staffing, Infection, prevention and control, Medicines optimisation, Assessing needs, Delivering evidence-based care and treatment, How staff, teams and services work together, Supporting people to live healthier lives, Monitoring and improving outcomes, Consent to care and treatment, Shared direction and culture, Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders, Freedom to speak up, Governance, management and sustainability, Partnerships and communities, Learning, improvement and innovation, Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives were positive about living at the service and confirmed staff were kind and caring. People and their relatives considered themselves and their family member to be safe living at Aarons Specialist Unit. However, not all safeguarding concerns were raised by staff with the management team at the earliest opportunity, and improvements were required to ensure all safeguarding concerns were raised with external agencies. Improvements were required to ensure people’s individual Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans [PEEPs] were detailed. Not all risks to people’s safety and wellbeing provided enough detail as to how identified risks should be mitigated. Records showed de-escalation techniques were not routinely used or considered prior to the use of restraint by staff. We received variable feedback about staffing levels from people and their relatives. The provider was not always working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Improvements were required to staff inductions, training and supervision. Some minor improvements were needed relating to medicines management. People’s needs were assessed prior to their admission to the service and relatives confirmed they were involved in this process. This information was used to inform their care plan and risk assessments. People were supported to access appropriate healthcare services and support as needed. The service was clean and odour free and infection control processes were robust. Relatives were complimentary regarding the management of the service, indicating the service was well managed and led. Although there were quality assurance arrangements in place to monitor the experience of people being supported, these arrangements had not identified the shortfalls found during this assessment. Where areas for action were identified during this assessment, immediate action was taken to include this within the service’s Home Action Plan.