Regulator tells Lauriston Christian Nursing Home it is not protecting the safety and welfare of people who use its services

18 April 2011

Lauriston Christian Nursing Home is not meeting 13 essential standards.

Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspectors who visited the Lauriston Christian Nursing Home in St Leonards on Sea found that it was failing to meet 13 essential standards of quality and safety.

Lauriston Christian Nursing Home is run by Trinity Care Limited, a subsidiary of Southern Cross Health Care, and provides accommodation for up to 60 people.

CQC inspectors visited the home in January after concerns were raised following a serious incident where a resident was harmed. The visit was to check whether The Lauriston Christian Nursing Home had made the necessary improvements to meet the essential standards of care. Providers of care services have a legal responsibility to make sure they are meeting all the essential standards of quality and safety.

The CQC report, which is published today, has concerns about 13 essential standards:

• Respecting and involving service users: The home did not ensure personalised care, treatment and support through involving and consulting with the people who use the service.
• Consent to care and treatment: Although the home had systems in place for gaining and reviewing consent, they were not being implemented appropriately for the majority of the people who use the service. Staff lacked appropriate training and awareness.
• Care and welfare: Treatment and care was not reflective of individual need, did not promote optimum safety and was task orientated and not person centred.
• Nutrition: The provision of food and drink at the time of the visit was not adequate to ensure people using the service were receiving a safe, suitable and balanced diet to support their health. Pureed diet for people who required them were not properly prepared or safely delivered.
• Safe and appropriate care: Inspectors found that service users did not always experience safe and appropriate care, treatment or support that met their needs and protected their rights. The provider failed to recognise and respond to risks and challenging behaviour has placed people at risk.
• Safeguarding people from abuse: Staff and managers at the home did not ensure through robust risk assessments, that the use of restraint is appropriate, reasonable and justifiable to all the people who use the service.
• Management of medicines: Medication management in the home was poor and places people at risk.
• Suitability of equipment: The home did not ensure that the use of specialised equipment was suitable and appropriate for each individual to meet varied health needs.
• The care environment: The heating and call bell facilities in the home needed improvement to ensure the safety and comfort of people living in the home. The home carried out relevant checks on prospective staff before employment started but did not ensure that they had the necessary training, experience and qualifications to perform the job competently.
• Staff numbers: There were too few staff to meet the high level of dependency of some people, particularly at times of intensive need such as meal times.
• Staff training and supervision: Residents at the home were at risk from staff who were not properly trained, supervised and appraised.
• Managing risks: The systems in place for quality monitoring were inadequate. Monthly reports did not identify clear shortfalls and the provider did not complete the home risk assessments within the timescale stated in their application to register with the CQC.
• Record keeping: The home failed to keep accurate, personalised care, treatment and support records in a secure and confidential manner.
• Management: The appointed manager has been in post since September 2010 but has not applied to become the registered manager. She had not undertaken any training since coming into post. The management structure of the home did not promote the health, safety and welfare of the people who use the service.

We have asked the provider to reply within 14 days of them receiving this report, setting out the action they will take to improve. We will check to make sure that the improvements have been made.

Lauriston Christian Nursing Home has submitted an action plan to CQC, outlining how it will address these remaining concerns in order to meet the standards. Inspectors will return to the care home unannounced to check whether the improvements have been made and to decide whether to initiate formal enforcement action.

CQC Regional Director for the South East, Roxy Boyce, said: “As well as these 13 major concerns, we also found that the home needed to make improvements in other areas.

“The care at Lauriston Christian Nursing Home has fallen far short of the standards people have a right to expect. We need to ensure that people living at the home are not at any immediate risk of harm, which is why we have been working closely with Hastings and Rother Primary Care Trust and local social services under safeguarding procedures.

“Despite there being some progress in care delivered at the home since our initial visit in January, it is disappointing that this was only made under our direction and under the threat of radical action.

“It is clear standards require significant further improvement so we will continue to scrutinise this service very closely indeed to ensure these improvements are made and sustained.”

Under the Health and Social Care Act 2008, the Care Quality Commission has a number of new enforcement powers that enable it to act swiftly when services are failing people. These include issuing warning notices, restricting the services that a provider can offer or the way it is provided; or, in the most serious cases, suspending or cancelling a service. CQC can also issue financial penalty notices and cautions or prosecute the provider for failing to meet essential standards.

Ends

For further information please contact the CQC press office on 0207 448 9239 or out of hours on 07917 232 143.

Notes to editors