CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Housman Care
Housman Care Ltd
Housman Court, School Drive, Bromsgrove, B60 1AZ
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Risk assessments had improved, but care records were not always updated promptly and staff observations about possible falls risks were not always followed up. Controlled medicines were stored safely, but the drugs register was not always accurate and up to date.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were not assured that oral care was carried out consistently, although this improved by the second inspection day. People had access to healthcare, suitable food and drinks, staff training, and support with decisions.
- Caring?
- Requires improvement
- People were not always treated with dignity and respect. Inspectors saw clothing, personal care and moving practices that did not protect people's dignity, and people were moved without always being asked about their wishes.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- Care plans were detailed, but care did not always reflect people's changing needs. Handover information was not recorded consistently, and staff did not always respond promptly when people needed help or said they felt unwell.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Management systems had improved but had not reliably identified poor dignity, incomplete care records or risks. The provider remained in breach of Regulation 17, and there was no registered manager in post at the time of the inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks in dignity, personalised care and management systems, although some safety improvements had been made.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 and 22 November 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care files, medicines, recruitment records and management systems.
All five areas were rated Requires Improvement. People were not always treated with dignity, and care was not always provided in line with their needs. Records did not always accurately show people's health or care, and staff did not always respond promptly when people felt unwell or needed help.
There were some positive findings. Staff understood safeguarding, people and relatives generally felt safe, staffing levels appeared sufficient, medicines were stored safely, and people had access to activities and health professionals. Some improvements were made during or just after the inspection, but the CQC said these needed to become consistent.
Safeguarding
Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. There were systems for reporting safeguarding concerns to the relevant authorities.
“Staff had knowledge of how to detect abuse and how to raise concerns.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found recruitment checks were robust. People, relatives and staff said there were enough staff to provide support when needed.
“People, staff and relatives told us there were enough staff to ensure people received care and support when needed.” from the report
Emergency planning
Each person had an emergency evacuation plan, and these plans were regularly updated and accessible.
“There were detailed fire procedures including Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPS) for every person using the service.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People took part in activities during the inspection and relatives said they were encouraged to maintain contact with their loved ones.
“There were a range of activities in the home during both days of inspection.” from the report
Dignity and respect
seriousInspectors saw people left with clothing or undergarments exposed and saw personal care being carried out without enough privacy. People were also moved without always being asked where they wanted to go.
“The provider had failed to ensure people were treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Care records and handovers
needs fixingRecords did not always reflect people's actual health or care. Important information from shift handovers, including when people were unwell, was not recorded consistently.
“There was no consistent system to identify and record key information from shift handovers, for example when people were unwell.” from the report
Responding to illness or requests
seriousA person told inspectors they felt unwell, but action had not been taken promptly to find out what was wrong. Another person asked quietly for help and did not receive a timely response.
“However, no action had been taken to seek medical advice to identify what was wrong.” from the report
Oral care
needs fixingInspectors found toothbrushes that appeared unused and staff could not explain how oral care was being provided for some people. The provider reinforced expectations, and inspectors found improvement on the second day.
“We were not assured that oral care was being carried out consistently.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingMedicines were stored safely, but records for controlled medicines were not always accurate or up to date.
“Improvements were needed to how they were recorded in the drugs register, which providers need to ensure is accurate and up to date.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure people's dignity and privacy are protected during personal care and moving?
- 02How do you now record handover information and make sure staff act quickly when someone feels unwell?
- 03What checks now confirm that care records accurately reflect the care people receive?
- 04How are falls risks, including concerns about footwear, reviewed and acted on?
- 05What action has been taken to improve oral care and keep the controlled medicines register accurate?
This was an unannounced inspection prompted by concerns about medicines, management and staffing; inspectors assessed all five key questions, and the inspection activity ran from 15 to 28 November 2023. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 January 2024 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 Housman Care Ltd
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- January 2024Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2023Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 March 2022.
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.