CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Ferncross Care
Draycombe House
1 Draycombe Drive, Heysham, Morecambe, LA3 1LN
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Some risks had not been properly assessed, some equipment safety checks had not been completed, and some staff training was outstanding. People said they felt safe, and the manager arranged risk assessments and equipment checks during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This key question was not inspected in this focused inspection. Its rating was not given in this report.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected in this focused inspection. The report nevertheless says people received kind and compassionate care and were treated with respect.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People were supported with personalised care, communication, independence and activities they enjoyed. The home had improved support for people to take part in the community.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The systems for checking the quality and safety of the home were not effective. The manager also lacked knowledge in some areas of responsibility for assessing safety.
What inspectors found, September 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care, but safety checks and quality monitoring were not reliable.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. The inspector visited on 13 July 2023 and returned to review further safety records. They spoke with people and staff, observed care, looked around the home, and checked care, medicine, staffing, training and safety records.
People said they felt safe and received kind care from staff who knew them well. The home had improved support for community activities since the previous inspection. People were supported with medicines, health care, communication and decisions about their lives.
However, some risks had not been properly assessed. Some equipment safety checks had not been completed, and some staff training was incomplete. The home also did not have effective systems to monitor safety and quality. The registered manager arranged some checks and risk assessments during the inspection, but the home remained in breach of two regulations.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement. Safe and well-led were rated Requires Improvement, while responsive was rated Good. This was the second consecutive inspection with an overall Requires Improvement rating.
Kind and respectful care
People received kind, compassionate and personalised care from staff who knew them well. Staff respected people's privacy, dignity, choices and communication needs.
“People received kind and compassionate care from staff who knew them well.” from the report
Community activities
People had returned to activities such as local clubs, family visits and local amenities. This was an improvement since the previous inspection.
“People told us they enjoyed the activities they followed in the community.” from the report
Support with medicines
Staff were trained to manage medicines safely and followed systems for administering, recording and storing them.
“People were supported by staff who followed systems and processes to administer, record and store medicines safely.” from the report
Staffing and safeguarding
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse, and recruitment checks were carried out.
“People were protected from abuse because staff understood how to identify and report any concerns.” from the report
Risks were not fully assessed
seriousSome risks to people's health, safety and welfare had not been assessed, or the assessments were not strong enough. Inspectors said this placed people at risk of harm.
“People were not protected against the risk of harm and infection because some risks had not been assessed and some risk assessments were not robust.” from the report
Safety checks were missed
seriousSome checks on equipment and the premises had not been completed. The manager arranged the required checks during the inspection.
“Some checks on the safety of equipment had not been carried out.” from the report
Weak quality monitoring
seriousThe home's systems did not identify the problems with risk assessments and safety checks. The manager also lacked knowledge in some areas of responsibility.
“The provider had failed to operate effective systems to ensure the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Some staff training incomplete
needs fixingSome staff had not completed training about keeping people safe. The manager had arranged for the required training to be completed.
“Some staff had not completed training around how to ensure people were safe.” from the report
- 01Which risk assessments were missing or not robust, and when were they completed?
- 02Have all equipment and premises safety checks now been completed, and how often will they be repeated?
- 03Which staff had not completed safety training, and has all required training now been completed?
- 04What new system will check that risks, equipment safety and service quality are monitored consistently?
- 05How will you maintain the improved programme of community activities for each person?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected, and their ratings were not given in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 September 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Draycombe House
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- September 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 February 2021.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.
Or stay at home with a private carer
Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.
Other services run by Ferncross Care LTD
1 other service on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.