CQC rates Gnosall residential home inadequate and places it into special measures

Published: 10 November 2023 Page last updated: 10 November 2023
Categories
Media

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has rated Gingercroft Residential Home, in Gnosall, Stafford, inadequate and placed it in special measures to protect people following an inspection in September.

This inspection was prompted due to concerns CQC received from the local authority about the oversight and safety of the service.

Gingercroft Residential Home is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 21 people. The service provides support to older people and those who may be living with dementia. At the time of inspection there were 18 people using the service.

Following this inspection, the service’s overall rating has dropped from good to inadequate, which is the same for being safe and well-led. Effective has dropped from good to requires improvement, however, how caring and responsive the service is, wasn’t rated at this inspection so remain rated as good.

The service is now in special measures, which means it will be kept under close review by CQC to keep people safe and it will be monitored to check sufficient improvements have been made.

Andy Brand, CQC deputy director of operations in the midlands, said:

“When we inspected Gingercroft Residential Home, we found significant shortfalls in leadership had created a culture which didn’t prioritise high quality care for the people who called it home. Our experience tells us that when a service isn’t well-led, it’s less likely they’re able to meet people’s needs in the other areas we inspect, which is what we found here.

“We found leaders weren't always visible and although staff felt supported by their colleagues, they didn’t always have the support of management or senior leaders. This lack of leadership was directly reflected in the level of care staff were able to give people. For example, although staff had received some training, they had other gaps in their knowledge and training preventing them from supporting people effectively.

“We found there weren’t always risk assessments put in place to ensure people were receiving safe care. For example, one person was at risk of choking however, their care plan wasn’t up-to-date and always being followed by staff who weren’t even aware the person was still at risk. Another person had displayed distressed behaviour, but this wasn’t reflected in their care plans to guide staff on how to support this person during these times. The fact that staff weren’t always aware of people's care needs meant they wouldn’t always know how to keep people safe, or ensure their well-being, putting people at risk of avoidable harm.

“Additionally, our inspectors found that the environment at home wasn’t always safe enough. For example, a door at the top of cellar steps, was left open and unattended posing a risk to both people using the service and staff of falling down them or becoming trapped. The registered manager told us to manage the risk, a staff member would stand at the top of the stairs when staff needed to access the cellar, however, we didn’t see this happening every time.

“We have reported our findings to the provider, and they know what they must address. We will monitor the service to ensure people are receiving safe care. If sufficient progress hasn’t been made, we will not hesitate to take action to ensure people’s safety and wellbeing.”

Inspectors found:

  • Staff were not always recruited safely as the appropriate checks were not always completed. There was mixed feedback about staffing levels and staff were not always deployed appropriately
  • Medicines management needed improving
  • Improvements were needed to infection controls practices in the service
  • There weren’t always effective systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of people's care
  • People's health needs were not always fully planned for, so staff did not always have detailed guidance
  • People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives
  • Staff did not always support people in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.

However,

  • The registered manager was open to feedback and eager to make improvements.

The report will be published on the CQC website in the next few days.

About the Care Quality Commission

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and social care in England.

We make sure health and social care services provide people with safe, effective, compassionate, high-quality care and we encourage care services to improve.

We monitor, inspect and regulate services to make sure they meet fundamental standards of quality and safety and we publish what we find to help people choose care.