Aaron Court Care Home

“Some improvements had been made, and the provider is no longer in breach of the regulations in relation to person-centred care, dignity and respect and consent. However, they remained in breach of regulations related to safe care and treatment and governance. We also found a further breach of the regulation relating to safeguarding. Further improvements were underway.”

“People were not always protected from the risk of harm because systems and processes were not consistently followed or effectively monitored. Records relating to injuries, including skin tears and bruising, were not always fully completed, creating a risk that safeguarding concerns may not be identified and acted upon appropriately. Accident and incident records were also not always fully completed or formally closed, limiting assurance that all necessary actions had been taken.”

“The provider's oversight of maintenance and environmental issues remained insufficient. Communication between the provider's head office and the home's management team was not always effective in relation to outstanding works. Therefore, the provider could not be assured that all required actions were being completed in a timely way. They took some immediate actions in response to the concerns identified.”

“Sufficient numbers of staff were deployed to meet people's needs, and people were supported by a consistent staff team. The home manager had focused on developing positive and supportive relationships with staff, and regular supervision arrangements had recently been introduced to support staff performance and development.”

“Improvements had been made to medicines management, and the provider was working to ensure medicines and treatments were safe and met people's needs, capacities and preferences. The home was generally clean, although some equipment required more robust cleaning arrangements.”

“The provider was taking steps to improve the quality of care delivered. Care plans were generally comprehensive and contained personalised information, and relatives were involved in care planning and kept informed of changes. However, some records still contained inaccurate or conflicting information, and further work was needed to ensure records were consistently accurate and up to date.”

“Staff sought people’s consent to provide care. Where mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were required, these were not always undertaken. The provider had identified this as an area requiring improvement and work was underway to address this.”

“Staff worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals and other agencies to support people's health and wellbeing. Monthly reviews of people's care were undertaken, and recent changes had been introduced to increase the involvement of people and their relatives in these reviews.”

“The service had previously experienced instability in leadership; however, since our last assessment a new management team had been established and greater stability was beginning to emerge. The home manager demonstrated a good understanding of people's needs and was taking action to make improvements. Whilst the provider had addressed some of the regulatory breaches identified at our previous assessment, various improvements remained ongoing and additional concerns were identified. Further work was needed to embed improvements and…”