You are here

Aden Court Care Home Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 6 December 2017

The inspection of Aden Court took place on 3 and 4 October 2017 and was unannounced. The home had previously been inspected during September 2016 and was found to require improvement in all five of our key questions at that time. The previous inspection found multiple breaches of regulations in relation to dignity and respect, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing. During this inspection, we checked and found improvements had been made in all these areas.

Aden Court is registered to provide residential and nursing care for up to 40 people. The home has a reception area, a large dining room, a choice of lounge areas and an activities room. All bedrooms are ensuite. At the time of our inspection there were 37 people living at the home, with 14 people receiving nursing care and 23 people receiving residential care.

There was a registered manager in post and this was a different registered manager since the last inspection. 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.

People told us they felt safe living at Aden Court. Appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures were in place, which staff understood, to protect people from abuse.

Risks to people had been assessed and a range of measures were in place to reduced identified risks.

Staff were recruited safely, with appropriate pre-employment checks taking place. Sufficient numbers of staff were deployed to keep people safe, however, some people felt improved quality of care could be provided if additional staff were deployed.

Regular safety checks took place such as those in relation to fire, gas and electrical systems. Plans and evacuation equipment were in place to safely evacuate people in the case of emergencies. Staff had been trained to use evacuation equipment effectively.

Actions had been taken to improve the management of medicines since the previous inspection. Medicines were managed and stored appropriately, although we did identify some missing information in relation to, ‘as required’ medicines on a small number of medication administration records.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and we observed staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the home supported this.

Staff had received training in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and demonstrated a good understanding of the requirements of the Act. Decision specific mental capacity assessments had been completed for people who lacked capacity to make specific decisions, as required by the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Care and support staff told us they felt supported. Staff received regular supervision, although this was sometimes to address specific issues, as opposed to a supportive two-way discussion.

Our observations indicated staff treated people with kindness and compassion. People told us staff were caring and we observed people’s privacy and dignity being respected. There was a pleasant atmosphere in the home. People’s cultural and religious needs were considered.

End of life care plans had been developed where appropriate and, where people did not wish to discuss this aspect of care, this was recorded and respected.

Care records were person centred and reviewed regularly. A ‘resident of the day’ system was being introduced, which was not yet fully embedded, to help ensure people were regularly involved in reviewing their care and support. People told us they could make their own choices in relation to their daily lives.

Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and people and their relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. Regular audits and quality assurance checks took place. It was evident the home was continuing to improve since the last inspection and the registered manager acknowledged this was ongoing.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 6 December 2017

The service was not always safe.

People told us they felt safe.

Staff did not always follow people’s care plans to ensure people were moved safely.

Staff were recruited safely and sufficient numbers of staff were deployed to keep people safe.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 6 December 2017

The service was not always effective.

Most people felt staff had the necessary skills to support them.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were applied.

Staff had received induction and ongoing training and supervision, although supervision was sometimes to address specific issues rather than providing support. Clinical staff received specific relevant training.

People received support to access health care services and to meet their nutrition and hydration needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 December 2017

The service was caring.

Positive interactions were observed between staff and people who lived at the home.

People told us, and we observed, privacy and dignity were respected.

End of life wishes were recorded and respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 December 2017

The service was responsive.

Care plans reflected people’s choices and preferences and were regularly reviewed.

People and staff spoke highly of the activities coordinator and people were able to engage in activities, if they wished to do so.

People knew how to complain if the need arose and complaints were well managed.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 6 December 2017

The service was not always well-led.

There was a registered manager in post. People and staff told us they had confidence in the registered manager.

Records relating to the care and support provided were not always accurate and complete.

The registered provider had up to date policies and procedures in place.

Regular audits and quality checks took place which resulted in continued improvements in the home.