Charnley House

People told inspectors they felt safe in the home. Safeguarding concerns were monitored and reported to the local authority when needed.

“People told us they felt safe, and systems were in place to monitor allegations of abuse.” from the report

Meals were cooked in the home. The cook knew people's likes and dislikes, and alternatives and fortified diets were provided when needed.

“The cook had a good knowledge of people's likes and dislikes.” from the report

Inspectors saw caring interactions between staff and people. Relatives and some people spoke positively about staff and the manager.

“We observed caring and positive interactions between people and staff; however, personal engagement was limited, and support was mostly task led.” from the report

People were supported to keep friendships and important relationships. Relatives were seen visiting during the inspection.

“People were supported to maintain friendships and important relationships.” from the report

Records did not always show that medicines, creams, thickener or time-specific medicines were given correctly. Night-time medicine arrangements also created a risk that medicines would not be given when needed.

“Medicines were not managed safely. This placed people at risk of harm.” from the report

Care plans and monitoring records were sometimes incomplete or contradictory. Inspectors found missed checks, equipment not being used and injuries without proper body maps or incident records.

“Individual risks to people were not always managed safely. This placed people at risk of harm.” from the report

Inspectors were not assured that there were enough staff, particularly at night. Training and supervision were not up to date for all staff, including training relevant to dementia, catheter care and end of life care.

“The provider had not ensured there was enough staff and not all staff had received training and supervision to safely meet the needs of people using the service at all times.” from the report

Some communal areas and bedrooms were unclean and had unpleasant smells. Inspectors also found unsafe or poorly maintained areas, unsecured wardrobes and uncovered radiators.

“The home was not always clean and safely maintained. This placed people at risk of harm.” from the report

Some people were not well groomed and did not receive enough help with personal care. Daily activities were limited and were not always meaningful or suited to people's interests.

“People were not always supported to enable them to take part in inclusive and person-centred activities of their choice.” from the report

Audits and improvement plans had not identified or resolved several problems. People's feedback and requests were not consistently acted on.

“The provider had not demonstrated continuous improvement and had not always ensured safe and effective governance of the service.” from the report