Pelham House, Folkestone, has been rated inadequate by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and placed in special measures, following an inspection undertaken in August.
The care home, which provides support to older people, some of whom are living with dementia, was inspected to follow up on concerns about the standards of care being provided to people.
These concerns were substantiated by CQC inspectors, and the service has been placed in special measures, meaning it will be kept under close review to ensure people are kept safe while the necessary improvements are made.
As well as being rated inadequate overall, the service was rated inadequate for being safe and well-led. As the inspection was in response to specific concerns, CQC didn’t rate how caring, effective or responsive the service was on this occasion.
Hazel Roberts, CQC head of adult social care inspection, said:
“We take concerns shared with us about the care being provided to people extremely seriously and inspected Pelham House as a result of such feedback.
“We found standards of care fell way below what people should expect and a number of issues were putting people at risk.
“People didn’t always receive their medication as prescribed and the premises weren’t always clean or safe for people living with dementia. People were at risk of falling, but incidents weren’t recorded or reported properly, and lessons weren’t learnt to avoid these risks from happening in future. We also found that people didn’t receive consistent care, from people they knew well as staff turnover was so high.
“We have told the service what it must do to improve but if we aren’t assured people are safe at the service, we won’t hesitate to take further action, which could include placing restrictions on the home’s registration or even closing the care home altogether.”
The inspection found:
- Some areas of Pelham House weren’t clean, and we weren’t assured that infection outbreaks would be effectively prevented
- Risks to people’s health, safety and welfare weren’t consistently assessed or monitored, with one relative telling us they didn’t feel their loved one was safe
- Cleaning products weren’t locked away, and people could access the laundry and kitchen unsupervised, which put them at risk. Hot water taps weren’t temperature controlled, which meant people could scald themselves
- Staff didn’t seek medical advice for one person who had fallen several times to establish any possible underlying cause. Following the inspection this person was referred to an occupational therapist and moved to a downstairs room
- Accidents and incidents weren’t always recorded or referred to the relevant healthcare professionals effectively
- Staff and management didn’t wear face masks in line with government guidance
- There had been a high staff turnover and a reliance on agency staff, so that people living at the service didn’t receive consistent care and had to tell staff how they needed supporting
- There was a lack of oversight at the service from leaders and improvements weren’t maintained
- People didn’t feel well-informed about the service.
- Staff knew how to raise safeguarding concerns
- Staff were positive about the manager and felt they could raise any issues
- The service met the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act.