Marland Court

This report details an inspection of Marland Court, a care home for older people, conducted in September 2022. The inspection aimed to assess the service's overall quality and compliance with regulations. It identified several areas where improvements are needed to ensure residents receive safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well-led care. The report outlines specific findings across these five key areas, offering a detailed picture of the service's current performance and highlighting opportunities for development.

On safety, the home has systems to protect residents from abuse and staff understand safeguarding procedures, however, concerns were raised by staff and residents about current staffing levels. Gaps were noted in new staff recruitment records, and some care plans and risk assessments were incomplete, not always identifying or managing risks to health and well-being. Medicines were not always stored and administered safely, and while the home's cleanliness was satisfactory, staff were not always wearing personal protective equipment correctly.

In terms of how effective the care is, residents were generally satisfied with the food, but dietary records were not consistently maintained, and adapted cutlery was not always provided. While staff understood consent, there were no mental capacity assessments documented, and the system for managing Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards required updating. Residents' physical and mental health needs were not always fully recorded in their care plans, and some areas of the home require redecoration and refurbishment.

Regarding the caring aspect, residents generally found staff helpful and pleasant, and relatives expressed no safety concerns. However, residents' dignity and independence were not always upheld, particularly when the passenger lift was out of order, preventing access to the ground floor. Also, residents had not been issued with keys for their bedroom doors, impacting their autonomy. Laundry arrangements were also a point of concern for some residents.

Concerning how responsive the service is, people generally felt listened to, but had few opportunities to participate in activities, increasing the risk of social isolation. The home had plans to recruit an activity coordinator. Care plans, especially temporary ones, were often brief and lacked detail, with no documented final wishes for one resident receiving end-of-life care. Residents also had limited opportunities to voice their opinions, with no evidence of group meetings or satisfaction surveys.

Finally, looking at how well-led the service is, while the management team expressed commitment to making improvements and had plans in place, there were significant shortfalls in governance systems. Audits identified issues with risk management, medicine handling, resident dignity and independence, care planning, and record keeping. The nominated individual, operations manager, and manager were all new to their roles, with the manager only in post for two weeks at the time of inspection.