Archived: Shannon Court

As a result of the last inspection we set compliance actions for care and welfare and assessing the quality of the service and took enforcement action to ensure there were adequate staff to provide appropriate care.

Since the last inspection we received further concerning information regarding the number of staff available to provide care for people. Therefore part of this inspection also reviewed those concerns.

At this inspection we found the provider had taken appropriate actions to achieve compliance. Arrangements had been put into place to increase the number of staff. This meant people were receiving their care at times that better suited their needs and preferences. A new system for assessing people's needs in order to determine the number of staff required had been introduced. Action had been taken to ensure that the provider organisation increased their reviews of the service in order to more regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service for people.

We spoke to five people who used the service, eight staff as well as the registered manager and deputy manager. We spoke briefly to the Chief Executive of the provider organisation who was visiting the service in order to speak to people and staff.

The people who used the service told us they were happy at the home and their needs were met. One person said, 'I've settled in well here. The staff can't be praised enough for what they do for me'. Another person said, 'The staff are good. I never have to wait too long when I need them, usually only two or three minutes. Sometimes I need to wait 15 minutes for help with the toilet but they come and explain this to me straight away'.

All the staff we spoke with told us that the recent increase in staff numbers meant they were less rushed when helping people with their care. The staff told us they were able to assist people at a time of people's choosing rather than when the staff had time. The staff said the increase in staff had made a difference to both their morale and the time they were able to spend caring for people. During the inspection our observations and our review of the records confirmed the staff's view that there were enough staff to provide appropriate and safe care.

The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People had been cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. There were not enough staff on duty to meet all the needs of the people living at the home in a timely way and this affected the care people received at times. There were suitable arrangements in place to manage emergency situations.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place. Relevant staff have been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they were happy with the care they received and felt their needs had been met, although people commented on the lack of staff leading to delays in care being provided. It was clear from what we saw and from speaking with staff that they understood people's care and support needs and that they knew them well.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers were patient and gave encouragement when supporting people. One person told us, 'The staff are lovely and they help me." A relative told us, "I have no concerns about the care here; it's a very good home'.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. People told us they knew about their care plans but they had not always been involved in regularly reviewing their care. People told us they were asked for their opinion about the service. We observed the staff seeking people's views. Records confirmed people's preferences and needs but the care plans did not include enough detail to offer the staff the guidance they required to meet people's individual needs. We observed some very positive group activities taking place throughout the day.

Is the service well-led?

Staff felt that their views had not been listened to or acted on regarding the staffing levels in the home. People had been asked for their views regarding the food and changes had been made as a result. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities although they said they could not always fulfil their roles due to conflicting demands on their time, for example shift leaders being required to deliver care. The service had a system for monitoring the quality of the home but this had not always been used effectively.

We saw that people's care plans had been completed with an assessment of their needs and had the appropriate risk assessments completed to help keep people safe. People and relatives told us that staff were "Kind", "Caring" and "Went the extra mile." We found that staff reacted quickly to emergencies to ensure that people were safe.

We found that the home had suitable arrangements in place to ensure that medicines were administered safely and effectively and there were systems in place to ensure that medicines were stored correctly. We also found that staff had received appropriate training in administering medicines.

The home did not always have the minimum levels of staff that it had set and this sometimes meant that staff were busy however one person told us that "Care was not compromised."

We found that records were in the process of being transferred to an electronic care planning system. Records were stored securely and were up to date.

We spoke with two relatives of a person that used the service. They told us 'The staff are lovely, from the bottom to the top and they keep us well informed.'

We spoke with four staff members that worked at the home. They all told us that felt well supported in their roles.

We looked at the care records of five people that worked at the service. We saw that people's preferences, likes and dislikes had been recorded. We found that people's needs had been assessed and care plans put in place to ensure their needs were met. We saw that risks had been identified and measures put in place to reduce them.

We found that staff received regular training and an annual appraisal. We were concerned about a staff members' lack of knowledge of the people for whom they were providing care.

We saw that the provider had effective systems in place to ensure that they regularly assessed and monitored the service. We were concerned that we found some care records did not match people's current care needs.