Aaron Court is registered to provide accommodation for up to 73 people who require nursing or personal care. The service offers support to older people and people living with dementia. At the time of the inspection visit there were 65 people living at the service.The inspection was unannounced and took place on the 7 & 8 February 2017. A previous inspection was carried out in February 2015 during which the service was found to be ‘requires improvement’. The follow up inspection completed in July 2015 found that action had been taken to address the issues that had been identified, and the service was rated as ‘good’.
There was a registered manager in post who had been registered with the CQC since December 2010. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At this inspection we identified breaches of Regulations 12 and 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
Pressure relieving mattresses were not always on the correct setting which placed people at risk of harm. In addition, we observed that mattress settings did not always correspond to checks that had been carried out by staff and staff had failed to identify where the setting specified by records was not correct. This showed inaccurate recording of information and demonstrated that this system was not robust.
A bathroom tap dispensed water at 50 degrees Celsius, which is above the maximum limit of 44 degrees Celsius set by the Health and Safety Executive, where outlets are accessible to people. This place people at risk of scalding. This had been identified as an issue, as demonstrated by signage which warned that the water was hot. However appropriate action had not been taken to address this issue.
A majority staff treated people with dignity and respect, however we observed occasions where staff were task-led in their approach, or did not speak to people in a dignified way. This had not previously been identified as an issue, and therefore action had not been taken to address this. We have made a recommendation to the registered provider around the appointment of dignity champions to assist staff with recognising poor practice.
Audit systems had failed to identify and adequately address the issues found during the inspection visit. This showed that these systems needed to be more robust.
Some positive relationships had been developed between people and staff. We observed examples where they laughed and chatted together. Staff also acted to relieve people’s distress, for example by offering reassurance where people experienced episodes of anxiety. People’s family members also told us that they were made to feel welcome when they visited the service. People told us that a majority of staff were kind.
The environment was clean, safe and well maintained. However little consideration had been given to how the environment could be adapted to enhance the experiences of people living with dementia or a sensory impairment. For example, food menus were written in small writing and were not up-to-date, and there were no distinctive markers in corridors to help people find their way around. The registered provider had plans in place to carry out a refurbishment of the service.
People were protected from abuse. Staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable people and were aware of the signs and indicators that may show abuse is taking place. Staff were aware of whistleblowing procedures and when they should use these.
Recruitment processes were robust and helped ensure that people’s safety was maintained. Checks were carried out prior to new staff starting to ensure they were not barred from working with vulnerable adults. References were also sought from their most recent employers. This helped inform the registered provider about the suitability of candidates.
People were given their medicines as prescribed. Medication administration records (MARs) were completed as required by staff. Medicines were stored at the correct temperatures in line with manufacturer guidance. This helped ensure that medicines maintained their efficacy.
People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People received support in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff had received training and were aware of their roles and responsibilities in relation to this. People had been given the opportunity to challenge restrictions placed upon them as required by the MCA.
People had been supported to access input from health and social care professionals where required. People’s family members gave examples where their relatives had been referred to their GP for support due to poor health. This helped ensure that people’s health and wellbeing was maintained.
Care records were personalised and contained information around what staff needed to do to support people in relation to their individual needs. These also contained information around people’s life history which enabled staff to get to know the people they were supporting. This helped to facilitate positive relationships between people and staff.
The registered provider had recently employed two activity co-ordinators to support people engage in activities. We observed people being engaged in one-to-one chats and group activities, including a game and sing-a-long. This helped ensure that people were protected from the risk of social isolation.
Audit systems were in place and carried out by both the registered manager and the registered provider. These systems looked at areas such as accidents and incidents, weight monitoring and complaints. This had ensured that these aspects of the service were being carried out to a good standard.