The Meadowcroft Care Home

“The last rating for this service was good [published 21 October 2024] with breaches of regulations. We undertook this inspection to check the provider had improved and followed the action plan we required them to complete after we had identified breaches of regulations at their last inspection. This onsite inspection was unannounced and conducted by 3 adult social care inspectors. We reviewed all 15 quality statements related to the 2 key questions, Is the service safe and well-led? For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at their last inspection to calculate the overall rating.”

“Based on the findings of this inspection we have changed their overall rating from good to requires improvement. This was because the provider had not made enough improvements since their last assessment and therefore, remained in breach of regulations. This included 2 new breaches in relation to the way the provider monitored and managed their fire safety arrangements and staff supervision and appraisal meetings. As well as a repeat breach regarding governance and record keeping systems because they had failed for the second consecutive inspection to take appropriate and timely action to address issues, we identified at this and their previous inspection.”

“In addition, leadership at the service had not been consistent because they had not had a stable management team in place for over 6 months. The service experienced high levels of management turnover and remained without a registered manager. The service also continued to be heavily reliant on agency care staff due to a shortage of enough permanent staff.”

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

“The issues described above notwithstanding the service had improved how they managed medicines and were no longer in breach of the associated regulation. This was mainly because the provider had introduced an electronic medicines system which ensured peoples medicines were now safely monitored and managed. People received their medicines as prescribed.”

“Furthermore, people were kept safe and protected from avoidable harm. Staff understood and managed potential risks well. Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. Staff recruitment practices were safe. There were enough staff who were visibly present throughout the onsite inspection. Staff were valued and received all the relevant training they needed to perform their roles and responsibilities well. Infection risks were safely managed.”

“Managers and staff had a shared vision and culture. The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The service valued diversity in their workforce. The service supported staff well-being and staff were treated equally. Managers and staff worked closely with local community health and social care professionals and agencies to deliver the best possible care. The service was receptive to innovative ideas.  ”

“ ”

“ ”

“ ”