Our current view of the service
Updated
20 March 2024
We carried out our on-site assessment on 25 June 2024, off site assessment activity started on 12 June 2024 and ended on 11 July 2024. We looked at 9 quality statements and 31 evidence categories relating to; Safe systems, pathways and transitions, Safeguarding, Involving people to manage risks, Safe and effective staffing, Medicines optimisation, How staff, teams and services work together, Independence, choice and control, Equity in experiences and outcomes and Governance, management and sustainability.
We found 2 breaches of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and governance. Staff did not consistently ensure people received safe care or assess risks to people’s health and wellbeing in sufficient detail to mitigate any such risks. Governance arrangements were not effective in identifying or addressing areas for improvement.
People's experience of the service
Updated
20 March 2024
People and relatives were mostly positive about living at the service. People told us they felt safe and had no concerns about their safety and wellbeing. However, the delivery of care for people was not always safe. Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing did not always provide enough detail as to how identified risks should be reduced. Improvements were required to ensure the proper and safe use of medicines. Staff were responsive to people’s requests for assistance and responded promptly to people’s call alarms. However, we received variable feedback about staffing levels from people, relatives and staff. Minor improvements were required to the provider’s recruitment practices and ensuring staff received an induction. Records failed to demonstrate restraint must only be used by staff in exceptional circumstances.
People were supported to access a range of healthcare services and support as needed. Relatives told us they were kept up to date about their family members needs and the outcome of health-related appointments. People told us staff treated them well and relatives confirmed they were happy with the support their family member received. People were supported by staff to maintain aspects of their independence.
Relatives were complimentary regarding the management of the service, indicating the service was well managed and led. Relatives spoken with stated they would recommend Jasmine Court Nursing Home to others. Not all people who used the service and relatives knew who the registered manager was or their name. Not all people and those acting on their behalf were aware of ‘resident’ and relative meetings having taken place. Where areas for improvement were alluded to, these referred to the lack of social activities available at the service.