Meadow Court Residential Home

Updated 7 July 2025

Dates of assessment was from 31 July to 11 September 2025. The assessment was triggered due to an aged rating as the service was last inspected in 2020. There were no previous breaches identified however a recommendation was made in relation to the safe storage and management of medicines.

The assessment included site visits to the service on 31 July, 6 August, 26 August and 2 September 2025. This included a visit outside of normal working hours. Meadow Court Residential Home is a care home providing personal care for up to 37 people, some of whom may have dementia. At the time of the assessment, there were 31 people living at the service.

We identified 2 breaches in regulation relating to safe care and treatment and good governance. We have asked the service for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment. The service has been responsive in addressing the concerns we raised with them and have taken immediate remedial action.

People did not receive consistently good person-centred care. Care relating to additional needs was sometimes not considered. People were not always involved in making decisions around their care and we found care plans to be of mixed quality. Some reflected people’s needs and preferences well, others were lacking in detail, particularly in relation to those with people with additional needs. This did not support staff to deliver care which reflected people’s needs, wishes and preferences. There was a lack of effective processes relating to quality assurances systems, safeguarding and documentation. The service was not always responsive to meeting people’s care needs. The service did not always work well with external agencies to manage risk and support care needs.

Staff did not always assess risks to people's health and safety or mitigate them where identified. Incidents were not consistently investigated and reported. Medicines were not always managed safely. There was a significant lack of oversight at the service and quality assurance systems and processes were not always effective.

The service was clean and hygienic and safe infection control procedures were followed. People were supported to live healthier lives and had access to health care services. People gave mixed feedback about the food and drinks provided. Staff were deployed effectively to meet people’s needs. Staff were observed to be caring, kind and compassionate and knew people well.

Updated 7 July 2025

Most people said they felt safe, well-cared for and were involved in decisions pertaining to their care. We observed sufficient staff on duty at all times. Staff had a pleasant rapport with people, who they appeared to know well. One person told us, “Yes, I am safe because everyone is so nice and friendly.” Staff were responsive to meeting people’s needs; however, these were not always assessed effectively. Relatives spoke very highly of the service and staff were described as kind and friendly by people. One relative told us, “I know they [people] are safe, there are always a lot of staff about.” Staff have good relationships with people and relatives who said the service was responsive to meeting people’s care needs and involved them in the planning and management of their care. People and relatives told us there were lots of activities going on that they were able to join in, if they so wished. People told us care was person-centred and reflected their needs and preferences, however this was not always evident in documentation. One person told us, “They [staff] are very kind and thoughtful. I go to bed when I want.” People and relatives said they felt able to approach any staff member if they had any issues and felt confident these would be dealt with promptly and appropriately. One person told us, “If I had a problem, I would tell somebody here. They [staff] listen, and they go deal with it.”