Naylorsfield and Hartsbourne

Inspectors found that staff were kind and respectful in their approach and knew people's usual preferences.

“Staff were kind and respectful in their approach towards people and were knowledgeable about their day-to-day preferences.” from the report

The home completed appropriate checks before employing staff, and inspectors found enough staff were deployed to meet people's needs.

“Staff were safely recruited. Appropriate checks had been made before being offered employment.” from the report

People were supported to use healthcare services, and staff worked with outside professionals to manage health conditions.

“People's health conditions were managed appropriately, and staff engaged with external healthcare professionals for example GP's, social workers and speech and language therapists.” from the report

The provider responded to some concerns during the inspection, including removing window restrictors and buying temporary cooking equipment.

“The registered manager and provider were receptive to our feedback and addressed some issues quickly such as the issues with access to food, window restrictors and staff use of lanyards and keys.” from the report

Some risks were not assessed or managed properly. Incident records lacked detail and there was little evidence that lessons were learned to prevent further harm.

“The provider failed to assess, monitor and mitigate risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service.” from the report

Some bedrooms were visibly dirty and unhygienic, with mould, old food and stained bedding. Damaged furniture and broken ovens also affected the living environment.

“Parts of the service in particular people's bedrooms were visibly unclean, unhygienic, and poorly maintained.” from the report

Medicines were kept in a room that was too hot, some as-needed medicines lacked protocols, and some staff medicines training was out of date or incomplete.

“Medicines were not stored safely as the room temperature exceeded the recommended maximum room temperature required to ensure medicines remained effective.” from the report

Access to food and windows was restricted without evidence that people or their representatives were consulted or that decisions were made in their best interests.

“The provider failed to work within the requirements of the MCA when imposing restrictions upon people.” from the report

Food stocks were limited and people could not freely access snacks between meals. Some people were unable to follow their usual activities and interests because of financial restrictions.

“The provider failed to ensure people's nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and planned for and that they had access to a variety of suitable and nutritious food.” from the report

Audits and governance systems did not identify serious problems with care, safety, restrictions or records. Some important incidents were not reported to CQC promptly.

“The provider failed to operate effective systems and processes to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service.” from the report