Shaftesbury St Giles

We reviewed 5 quality statements under this key question; safeguarding, involving people to manage risk, safe and effective staffing, infection prevention and control and medicines optimisation.

During the onsite site assessment people told us they felt safe living at St Giles. Concerns about safety were listened to, investigated and reported to the relevant local authority where required, however the provider failed to notify CQC in some instances. After the onsite assessment visit, the registered manager sent through the relevant statutory notifications retrospectively. Staff had been recruited safely. There were enough, suitably trained, staff to meet people’s needs. People received their medicines by staff who were trained to do so. Care plans contained risk information relating to individual people’s needs. Effective infection prevention and control measures were in place.

We reviewed 2 quality statements under this key question: assessing needs and consent to care and treatment.

We found that people were involved in their care and their consent to receive care was sought by staff and the management team. People had their needs assessed before care commenced and were involved in how their care would be delivered. There were effective approaches to monitor people’s care and treatment and their outcomes.

We reviewed 1 quality statement under this key question: Independence, choice and control.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and supported people to remain independent. People were supported by a caring staff group who respected their choices and preferences.

We reviewed 2 quality statements under this key question: listening to and involving people and equity in experience and outcomes.

People were supported to make decisions about their own care and support and staff treated people as individuals providing a person-centred approach. People had access to activities and opportunities to engage in their hobbies or interests. People had access to external health care professionals to ensure their health needs were met.

We reviewed 4 quality statements under this key question: shared direction and culture, capable, compassionate, and inclusive leaders, freedom to speak up and governance, management and sustainability.

Staff were clear about their responsibilities and roles and the majority felt supported by the manager and management team. Staff spoke positively about the leadership and culture of the service and their ability to speak up and be heard. The provider had quality assurance systems and processes in place. However, these were not always effective in monitoring the oversight of the service, this was in relation to notifying CQC of incidents occurring at the service. Following the assessment, the registered manager sent us the relevant statutory notifications retrospectively. We did not find these improvement needs affected the safety and quality of people’s care and any future risks were mitigated by the actions taken by the registered manager during this assessment.