• Care Home
  • Care home

Fountain Nursing and Care Home Limited

Overall: Inadequate read more about inspection ratings

11-17 Fountain Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham, West Midlands, B17 8NJ (0121) 429 6559

Provided and run by:
Fountain Nursing and Care Home Limited

Important:

We issued the Notice of Decision to Fountain Nursing and Care Home Limited on 08 August 2025 for failing to meet the regulations relating to; 9 - person centred care, 10 - dignity  and respect, 11 - gaining consent from people using the service; 12 - safe care and treatment, 14 - meeting nutritional and hydration needs, 15 - premises and equipment, 17 - good governance, 18 - staffing and 19 - fit and proper persons employed at Fountain Nursing and Care Home.

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Our current view of the service

Inadequate

Updated 9 April 2025

Date of Assessment: 30 April 2025 to 02 June 2025. The site visits took place on 30 April, 01, 06, 07, 14 and 27 May 2025. The assessment was prompted by reviewing information we held about the service and concerns raised with us about the safety and well-being of people at the service. Fountain Nursing and Care Home Limited is a care home, providing nursing and personal care for up to 27 older adults, many living with dementia or complex mental health needs. At the time of our assessment there were 26 people living at the service.

We found since our last inspection the service had deteriorated and we identified 9 new breaches of regulations relating to person centred care, dignity and respect, consent, risk management, nutrition and hydration, safe premises and equipment, staffing, fit and proper persons employed and good governance.

The provider did not ensure people’s individual needs and preferences were met. Staff failed to consistently uphold people’s dignity and respect or to gain their consent. Staff had insufficient guidance and knowledge for the management of people’s known health conditions and risks. People’s individual nutrition and hydration needs were not always managed effectively, and they were not fully supported to make choices about what they ate.

The care environment was not always maintained to a safe and hygienic standard. We found on-going maintenance of the premises and equipment was poor, due to the lack of robust systems and timely actions by the provider.

The provider’s quality assurance and auditing systems were not effective and had failed to identify many of the issues highlighted during the assessment. Systems to ensure care was provided safely and appropriately were not always robust.

At this assessment, we also found a lack of robust training and support were offered by the provider to ensure staff had the correct skills and knowledge to support people.

There was also a failure to ensure staff recruitment was robust.

In instances where CQC has decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.

This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

People's experience of the service

Updated 9 April 2025

Most people and relatives were positive about the quality of the care. They felt safe with the staff members who supported them. However, most people and relatives we spoke with told us they had not been involved in the planning or review of their care and had not seen a care plan. Feedback on the service had been gained from some people or their relatives via questionnaires. Most people said they received care from staff who treated them as individuals and they had regular care staff, who were available when needed. However, some people and their relatives felt there often were not enough staff, particularly at night. Most people and their relatives felt the activities and overall level of stimulation for people needed a lot of improvement, particularly for those who stayed in bed or in their rooms. People were not consistently matched with staff who were able to speak with them in their first language and understood their cultural and religious needs. Information was not provided in a format to meet individuals’ needs. People and relatives felt able to complain and most felt they would be listened to. Everyone we spoke with knew who the registered manager was and had spoken to or seen them. Generally, people and their relatives were happy with the standard of the environment, but some felt improvements were needed.