Archived: Shannon Court Care Centre

Updated 5 January 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The unannounced inspection took place on 06 December 2016. The inspection team consisted of two adult social care inspectors from the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we held about the home in the form of notifications received from the service. We contacted Bolton local authority commissioning team, who had been involved in regular service improvement meetings with the home. We also contacted the local Healthwatch to see if they had any information about the service. Healthwatch England is the national consumer champion in health and care.

During the inspection we spoke with six people who used the service, and three members of care staff and the manager. We looked around the home and spent time observing care including the tea time period in one of the houses. We reviewed records at the home including six care files, three staff personnel files, meeting minutes, training matrix and audits held by the service.

Updated 5 January 2017

Shannon Court Care Centre provides general nursing, dementia nursing and dementia residential care. The home can accommodate up to 78 people in single rooms, most of which are en-suite. On the day of the inspection there were 63 people currently using the service.

There was a manager at the service who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. 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.

The unannounced inspection took place on 06 December 2016. At the last inspection on 20 July 2016 the service was rated as inadequate and placed into special measures. This was due to finding multiple breaches of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 with regard to person centred care, dignity and respect, consent, safe care and treatment, safeguarding, meeting nutritional and hydration needs, good governance and staffing. At this inspection we found significant improvements in all areas.

A new dependency tool was now in use to calculate the level of need for each individual. This was used to inform staffing levels to ensure there were sufficient staff on each shift. There were enough staff on the day of the inspection.

The recruitment process was robust to help ensure suitable staff were employed at the service. Safeguarding protocols had been improved and staff had undertaken refresher training in this area.

A new treatment room had been set up and this was clean, tidy and well ordered. Medication systems were robust and medicines were now being managed safely at the service. Individual and general risk assessments were in place. Equipment was fit for purpose and was regularly serviced and maintained to ensure it was in good working order.

The environment was clean and tidy and a recent infection control audit had been carried out. The service had scored 98% which was a significant improvement on the last audit.

There was a new induction programme which helped ensure new employees were given appropriate training and orientation to work at the home. A programme of training had been commenced and all staff were undertaking training in appropriate subjects.

The service was working within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA). Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were in place where required and staff were aware of the implications of these.

People’s nutritional and hydration needs were assessed and recorded appropriately. The mealtime experience had been improved and new, more appropriate crockery had been purchased.

We saw that staff were kind and caring and there were good interactions between staff and people who used the service throughout the day. People who used the service and their families were involved in discussions about the delivery of their care. Staff respected people’s dignity and privacy.

People who were nearing the end of their lives were cared for, as far as possible, in accordance with their wishes.

The new care files we looked at had more information about each individual enabling staff to deliver care in a person centred way, taking into account people’s preferences, likes and dislikes.

There was a programme of activities at the home and people were encouraged to participate if they were able to. Some one to one interaction was undertaken with people who were unable to participate in group activities.

There was an appropriate complaints policy and this was displayed throughout the home. Concerns were responded to in a timely and appropriate manner.

Staff told us morale had improved since the new manager had commenced and they said she was supportive towards them. Regular team meetings were held, and a programme of staff supervisions was underway.

We saw evidence of audits and the analysis of information and follow up actions were now being undertaken.