St Georges Care Home

“Following the last assessment, the provider sent us an action plan on how they would meet the legal requirements. This assessment was to follow up the provider’s action plan and the breach of 1 legal requirement. During this assessment, we found improvements were still required to people regarding safe care and treatment. This is a repeated breach of legal requirement. We also found 2 new breaches of legal regulations as the provider was in breach of safe staffing and good governance. This meant the provider at this assessment was in breach of 3 legal requirements, safe care and treatment, safe staffing and good governance. The service had changed from good overall, it is now rated requires improvement.”

“During the inspection, the provider was not ensuring incidents and accidents and safeguarding concerns were being managed, documented and outcomes and referrals made as required. Improvements were needed to the care and support provided to people who were losing weight and who were at risk of pressure ulcers. Care was not always provided safely by enough staff to meet people’s individual needs and improvements were needed to staff training and supervision. Improvements were also needed to the care environment, equipment, the care and support people received, environmental risk assessments and where medicines posed a fire risk and how medicines were being managed as some medicines needed disposing of. We found improvements were needed to the provider’s quality assurance systems as not all shortfalls found during this inspection had been identified before our inspection.”

“Staff, people and relatives all raised mixed feedback on improvements being made by the service as some felt there had been some improvements. However, this was not consistently experienced with there being enough staff and staff being knowledgeable about people’s care and support. Some professionals told us improvements were still needed to there being regular staff in the service and with referrals being made when required.”

“The service was supported by the provider’s senior management team. They undertook meetings with staff, supervisions, quality visits and they liaised with the registered manager to go through the provider’s service improvement plan. The service had safe recruitment procedures and staff had a good knowledge of safeguarding and who to raise concerns with. People and their relatives felt the care provided was kind and care plans contained service users’ personal information such as any hobbies and interests, life histories, end of life wishes and any professionals involved in people’s care.”

“We asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.”