We carried out a review of the data available to us about Magnet Court on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Magnet Court, you can give feedback on this service.
Magnet Court provides support for up to fifteen people with enduring mental health conditions. People live on site in spacious, self-contained flats. Parking is available and the service is situated in a quiet residential area of Doncaster. Support packages are flexible and based on individual needs. The service is provided by SIL.2 Limited.
The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our 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. On the day of the inspection the registered manager was unavailable so the clinical lead received inspection feedback.
The service had a procedure in place to safeguard people from abuse. We spoke with staff who told us they had completed training in this area and knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staff told us they would report any issues to the assistant manager and felt confident they would deal with the matter immediately. The provider was notifying CQC about incidents that had occurred when required.
CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. The members of the care staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
The provider was following safe recruitment procedures. People told us they were involved in the recruitment of new staff.
Records and observations showed us there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to support people in line with their needs. People received one to one support when this was needed and staff were skilled in providing person centred support.
There were systems in place to ensure people's medicines were managed safely. Staff were trained and had their competency assessed to administer medicines. We made a recommendation around recording of medicines.
Staff were trained to carry out their role and felt they had the necessary skills to do their job. Through our observations we saw staff knew people well and understood their needs. Healthcare professionals were accessed as required.
The provider had a complaints policy to guide people on how to raise concerns.
We found the provider had robust audit and monitoring systems in place to identify and address shortfalls. Staff we spoke with felt the service was well led.
Magnet Court provides support for up to fifteen people with enduring mental health conditions. Service users live on site in spacious, self-contained flats. Parking is available and the service is situated in a quiet residential area of Doncaster. Support packages are flexible and based on individual needs.
The service did not have a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. However, the service had an assistant manager whose role was to oversee the day to day operation of the service until a new manager commenced employment. We were told that a manager had been selected and was due to start working at the service in April 2016. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.
The service had a procedure in place to safeguard people from abuse. We spoke with staff who told us they had completed training in this area and knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staff told us they would report any issues to the assistant manager and felt confident they would deal with the matter immediately.
The provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. We looked at prescribed medication and medication records for three of the people that were supported by the service. All the records we looked at were up to date and the administration had been accurately recorded. The service had a four stage process for supporting people to manage their medicines safely.
We spoke with the assistant manager about recruitment and were told that people who used the service were involved in the process.
Care and support was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people were safe. The support plans we looked at included risk management plans which identified any risk associated with people’s care.
Through our observations and by talking with staff we found there was enough staff available with the appropriate skill mix to meet people’s needs. People who used the service said there was always someone available and they could call them at any time.
Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by their managers and received appropriate training to carry out their roles effectively. We spoke with the assistant manager about training and were told it was provided by external trainers and they had access to the local authorities learning pool.
We found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of this and said they would speak with the assistant manager if they needed any further advice.
People were supported to make healthy choices in relation to food and drinks. People who used the service told us that if they required support, staff would assist them to draw up a menu for the week, prepare a shopping list and purchase the required items.
People were supported to maintain good health, have access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support. We looked at people’s records and found they had received support from professionals when required.
We found that staff knew people well and were aware of their likes and dislikes. They worked with people on an individual level and operated a key worker system which assisted them in getting to know people well.
Staff worked with people to support them to achieve their objectives in line with their views and opinions. Staff had built good working relationships with people where they felt able to chat in an open and friendly manner.
Support plans we looked at were person centred and contained useful information required to support people effectively.
The service had a complaints m system in place and this was seen as an integral part of continuous improvement. People knew how to raise concerns and we saw evidence that concerns had been dealt with effectively.
Staff we spoke with felt the service was well led and the registered manager was approachable and listened to them. Staff confirmed they knew their role within the organisation and the role of others. They knew what was expected of them and took accountability at their level.