- Care home
Meadows Edge Care Home
Report from 17 September 2024 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 20 August 2024 to 06 September 2024. Meadows Edge Care Home is a nursing home providing personal and nursing care to up to 45 people. At the time of our assessment there was not a registered manager in place. We also used an Expert by Experience to gain feedback about people’s experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. This assessment reviewed the key questions of Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well- led. The provider had made improvements in safeguarding people from harm. There was an up-to-date log of concerns raised with the local authority safeguarding team. The provider had also made improvements in staffing and there was now a dedicated clinical lead. However, not enough improvement had been made and we found the provider was still in breach of 2 legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. There were 2 new breaches related to the standard of the premises and equipment and person-centred care. We found people were treated with kindness and supported to be independent where possible. People were not supported in a secure and attractive environment and the environment was not always designed with the needs of people living with dementia or other cognitive impairments in mind. Information in care plans for people who were at the end of their lives was basic with no evidence of any person’s preferences being known or considered. People’s care was not always delivered in a way which promoted equality and ensured good outcomes. The manager had put new systems in place to gain feedback from people and their relatives which had improved people’s experiences.
People's experience of this service
Most people were unable to express their experience of receiving care. We used a combination of observation, speaking with relatives and reviewing written records to assess people’s experience. Relatives had mixed views about the care provided. Most relatives thought their loved ones were safe, however, one relative had concerns about an unwitnessed fall. In addition, concerns were raised about their loved one’s weight loss. Some relatives were also concerned about the language skills of the staff and their ability to communicate well with people who used the service. People’s relatives told us, and care records showed they were not always involved in planning their care needs. People were treated with kindness and staff understood the importance of promoting people’s independence. However, people’s individual needs and preferences were not always clearly document in their care plans. Care records concentrated on what people were not able to do and did not support people’s strengths, or how to keep them independent. Information was not always accessible, and people’s care was not always delivered in a way which promoted equality and ensured good outcomes. Care plans included how people communicated, although not all information was accurate or in line with what we had been told. It was not clear when or if planning for the future was discussed with people. Information in care plans for people who were at the end of their lives was a basic with no evidence of any person’s preferences being known or considered. Staff did not always follow best practice guidance for the management of skin integrity, monitoring bowel movements and monitoring of mood and signs of distress. Care plans and monitoring records did not always support the safe administration of medicines. In addition, it was not always recorded why a dose of medicine had been changed or why the decision had been made.