Shannon Court

People were safeguarded from abuse. Most risks to people's health and wellbeing had been assessed but improvements were required to ensure the records were robust for staff to follow. Comments relating to staffing were variable with some people implying there were on occasions insufficient staffing levels at the service. At the time of our assessment there were enough staff deployed in line with staffing levels stated by the registered and deputy manager.

Staff recruitment records demonstrated relevant checks were completed before a new member of staff started working at the service. Staff received an induction, mandatory and specialist training, and regular supervision. Staff met good practice standards to ensure the proper and safe use of medicines. People were protected by the provider’s prevention and control of infection procedures.

At our last inspection in March 2022, the provider did not ensure people’s consent and best interest decisions had been obtained in line with legislation and guidance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The service had made improvements and is no longer in breach of regulations.

People’s needs were assessed prior to their admission to the service and this information was used to inform their care plan and associated risk assessments. People were supported to access healthcare services and receive ongoing healthcare support. The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People’s comments about the quality of the care provided were generally positive and people were treated with care and kindness. However, improvements were required to ensure staff provided individualised support to people at mealtimes and robust records maintained relating to their fluid intake. Wellbeing initiatives were in place for staff.

People received personalised care that met their needs. People were supported to maintain relationships that matter to them. The provider had a variety of procedures and arrangements in place to capture people’s views and involve them with the service.

Whilst there were some improvements to be made, the registered manager was receptive to our findings and demonstrated a willingness and commitment to make any required improvements where shortfalls were identified. People implied the service was well managed and led. Staff were supported and valued. The provider’s governance arrangements monitored people’s experience to help drive improvement.