27 June 2018
During a routine inspection
At this inspection, we found one breach of the regulation had been met and some improvements have been made. However, the provider was still in breach of four regulations related to safeguarding, safe care and treatment, good governance and notifying the Commission of specific events and incidents as required. We have rated the service ‘Requires improvement’ overall for a fourth time. We have decided the provider is still required to submit monthly reports to the Care Quality Commission because sufficient improvements have not been made since our last inspection and they remain in breach of the regulations.
Allenbrook Nursing Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Allenbrook Nursing Home accommodates up to 36 people in one building. There were 28 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.
A new manager had joined the service in February 2018 and had not yet registered. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe. However, further improvements were needed to ensure all people’s risks were safely managed including people’s equipment use and support with their medicines. Further improvements were required to ensure people would always be protected from the risk of abuse. We received mixed feedback around whether there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and recruitment checks had not been carried out as planned.
People and relatives spoke positively about the care provided including meals offered. Staff showed awareness of people’s health needs and told us they found training useful. People told us they were given choices and their consent was sought, although improvements identified at the last inspection relating to the Mental Capacity Act (2005) had not been fully addressed. We saw people could access healthcare services and the home was being supported to drive further improvements in this area.
People told us staff were kind and caring. Staff showed care for people, however this had not informed a consistently caring and respectful approach. We observed task-based care from some staff which did not promote people’s dignity and positive experiences. People were not always well engaged with and involved in their care as far as possible.
People did not all have good access to activities and things they may have enjoyed. Further improvements were planned to ensure care planning recognised and met all people’s needs and preferences, including around end-of-life care. People and relatives felt able to complain and that this feedback would be used to improve their experiences.
Systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service were not effective. Concerns at our last inspection had not been fully addressed and the provider remained in breach of the regulations. There was a new manager and fully recruited staff and nursing team. People and relatives with generally expressed a positive experience of the service, although they felt there were not always enough staff or things to do. People were not engaged and involved in the service as far as possible to drive improvements and positive experiences of using the service.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.