Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a nursing home, run by Nugent Care

Margaret Roper House

447 Liverpool Road, Birkdale, Southport, PR8 3BW

Requires improvementpublished 11 January 2024, 2 years ago

Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Requires improvement
Risks were not always assessed or managed accurately. Medicines records and staff competency checks were incomplete, and the premises had fire safety, equipment, cleanliness and repair concerns.
Effective?
Requires improvement
Consent records did not always follow the Mental Capacity Act. Care plans did not always give enough guidance about diets or show that professional advice had been followed, and some staff refresher training was overdue.
Caring?
Good
Caring was not inspected during this focused inspection, so no new rating was given. People said staff treated and supported them well.
Responsive?
Good
Responsive was not inspected during this focused inspection, so no new rating was given.
Well-led?
Requires improvement
Quality checks and action plans were not reliable enough, and records were not always accurate. The home had no registered manager in post and had been without one for over 12 months.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, January 2024

Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks with care records, medicines, premises and management systems.

This was an unannounced focused inspection on 13 November 2023. Inspectors looked only at Safe, Effective and Well-led. They spoke with five people, staff and managers, and checked care records, medicines, staff files and quality records.

The home was not always safe or effective. Risk assessments and care plans were incomplete or inconsistent. Medicines checks and records were not always reliable. Some fire safety checks, equipment checks and cleaning arrangements were not adequate. Staff training and consent records also needed improvement.

Management oversight was not strong enough. The home had been without a registered manager for more than 12 months, and audits had not always led to action. The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection in 2017 to Requires Improvement. The provider had started work on some problems, but CQC will monitor progress.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind staff

    People gave positive feedback about how staff treated and supported them. People appeared calm and at ease in the home.

    People told us they were treated and supported well and enjoyed living at the home.from the report
  • People felt safe

    People said they felt safe and knew they could speak to staff if they were unhappy.

    People told us they felt safe living at the service.from the report
  • Safe recruitment

    The recruitment records checked by inspectors included the required pre-employment checks.

    Recruitment of new staff was safe. Pre-employment checks were completed to help ensure staff members were safe to work with vulnerable people.from the report
  • Action had started

    The provider responded positively to the inspection and had begun work on some problems, including fire door repairs and changes to pharmacy support.

    Both the provider and quality compliance team responded in a positive and proactive way to the findings at our inspectionfrom the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Risk records were unreliable

    serious

    Care plans and risk assessments did not always explain how risks should be reduced. Some risk ratings were inconsistent or had not been reviewed.

    Risks were not always managed safely. Care plans and risk assessments did not always evidence people received planned care that met their needs.from the report
  • Medicines safety

    serious

    Records did not always show the care people needed or received for medicines. Some staff were not up to date with training or competency checks, and medicines policies lacked enough guidance.

    The provider failed to ensure medicines were managed safely, this was a breach of regulation 12 (Safe Care and Treatment) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.from the report
  • Premises and cleanliness

    serious

    Some internal doors were not fire safety compliant. Inspectors also found dirty communal toilets, damaged bathrooms and incomplete cleaning or safety checks.

    The provider failed to ensure the premises were safe to use by people, this was a breach of regulation 12from the report
  • Consent was not always recorded

    serious

    Records did not always show that people had agreed to their care plans. Mental capacity assessments were not always completed when there were concerns about a person's ability to consent.

    Failure to assess mental capacity and ensure consent was sought in line with the principles of the MCA, is a breach of Regulation 11from the report
  • Weak management oversight

    serious

    Audits did not always identify problems or lead to timely action. The home had no registered manager and had been without one for over 12 months.

    The provider failed to operate effective systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the servicefrom the report
  • Training and diet records

    needs fixing

    Some refresher training was overdue. Care plans and daily records did not always give or record the support people needed with specific diets and fluids.

    We recommend the provider ensures systems in place to train and support staff are more effective and refresher training is provided in line with best practice guidance.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What has been done to make the internal doors fire safety compliant, and has this work been checked?
  2. 02How are medicines now checked, and are all staff who administer them up to date with training and competency assessments?
  3. 03How will you make sure every person's risk assessment and care plan is accurate, current and clear for staff to follow?
  4. 04How do you record people's consent and complete mental capacity assessments when needed?
  5. 05When will a registered manager be in post, and how will the provider check that the action plan is working?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected, and the overall rating used the previous ratings for the questions not inspected. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Margaret Roper House

6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

  1. January 2024Requires improvementcurrent rating
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Margaret Roper House

  2. February 2021Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. December 2017Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. December 2016Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. September 2016Goodstayed Good
    Safe: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. January 2016Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. April 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. December 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. November 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. August 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  12. January 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 January 2011.

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.

Another option

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.

Same provider

Other services run by Nugent Care

2 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Lime House

Nr Warrington, WA3
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 8 months agocare home

St Josephs

Liverpool, L17
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near Southport

Garswood

Southport, PR8 · 2.3 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 8 years agocare home

Dinorwic Road

Southport, PR8 · 2.3 km
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home

Dovehaven House

Southport, PR8 · 2.6 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agocare home

York Road

Southport, PR8 · 2.8 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home