You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 16 July 2019

About the service:

Drayton Court is a care home, providing personal care and accommodation for up to 45 people. It provides care to older frail people, some of whom are living with dementia. The care home also offers ‘day-care’ on specific days of the week, the day care lounge is separately staffed. Care is provided over three floors. Each floor has communal lounges, dining areas and a kitchenette. At the time of our inspection visit 37 people lived at the home.

What life is like for people using this service:

Risks were not consistently well managed because actions to mitigate some identified risks had not been taken. Risk management plans did not always give staff clear guidance on how they should support people. There were sufficient staff on duty during the day shift. A few staff felt night time staffing was too low and the new manager told us they would look at this.

People had their prescribed medicines available to them and were supported with these by trained staff. Staff did not consistently ensure people’s medicines or prescribed items were stored securely which posed risks to people.

Staff received an induction, training and support from within the staff team, the provider’s trainer and managers. Despite staff being told about the provider’s values and vision, this was not embedded into the culture of the home as staff could not tell us what this was. Overall, the home was clean and tidy, and staff understood how to prevent risks of cross infection. There were some bedrooms with an offensive odour.

People had their needs assessed before they moved into the home. Overall, people had plans of care relevant to their needs. However, plans of care around pain management or future wishes for end of life care had not always been completed. Staff were trained to meet people’s day to day needs and protect people from the risks of abuse.

We received mixed feedback from people about what it was like to live at the home. Those people who required less staff support experienced more positive outcomes. People had opportunities to engage in group activities, however, these largely took place in the day care lounge and meant people who chose to remain on their 'household' or in their bedroom were at risk of social isolation because there were limited opportunities to engage in activities or with staff.

People had access to healthcare when required. People were offered enough food and drink to meet their dietary requirements. However, people’s mealtime experience was not always relaxed or enjoyable.

Some positive caring interactions took place between people and staff. However, some staff failed to follow the provider’s policies which posed potential risks to people and did not consistently reflect a caring attitude.

People made day to day decisions about their care and were supported by staff who worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff did not consistently ensure people’s private care records were stored securely or confidentially.

Overall, the provider’s quality assurance system identified where improvements were needed, but this was inconsistent and did not always ensure quality and safety.

A new manager had started and was prioritising areas that required improvement.

We reported that the registered provider was in breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. These were:

Regulation 12 Regulated Activities Regulations 2014 – Safe care and treatment

Rating at last inspection: The service was rated outstanding. (The last report was published on 18 April 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating of the last inspection. The service is now rated as ‘Requires Improvement’ overall.

Enforcement: Action provider needs to take (refer to end of report).

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If any concerning i

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 16 July 2019

The service was not consistently safe.

Details are in our Safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 16 July 2019

The service was not consistently effective.

Details are in our Effective findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 16 July 2019

The service was not consistently caring.

Details are in our Caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 16 July 2019

The service was not consistently responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 16 July 2019

The service was not consistently well led.

Details are in our Well Led findings below.