Crossbrook Court in Cheshunt has been rated inadequate by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and placed in special measures, following an inspection undertaken in June and July.
The service, which cares for people with a learning disability and autistic people, was inspected after concerns were raised with CQC about the quality of care being provided to people.
The service was previously rated good overall and in all key areas. Following this inspection it has been rated inadequate overall and inadequate for being responsive to people’s needs and well-led. It is rated requires improvement for being safe, effective and caring.
CQC has taken action against the service and placed it in special measures. It will be kept under close review, and if significant improvements aren’t made, CQC will take further action, which could include imposing restrictions on its registration or taking steps to prevent the service from operating, if people aren’t safe in its care.
Louise Broddle, CQC head of adult social care inspection, said:
“There has been a significant drop in the standards of care being provided to people at Crossbrook Court.
“People weren’t valued as equals and they weren’t supported to be as independent as possible. There wasn’t a great deal of opportunity for people living at the service to take part in activities or develop new skills, which had a real impact on their well-being.
“Staff didn’t support people to have maximum control over their lives and there were unnecessary restrictions in place, such as toilet and kitchen doors being locked.
“I want to see more person-centred care at the service, and we’ve been clear about the improvements needed. We’ll continue to monitor Crossbrook Court closely but if we aren’t satisfied that enough progress is being made, we’ll take enforcement action, which could mean closing the service.”
The inspection found that staff didn’t have the skills, knowledge and experience to effectively support people with a learning disability and autistic people. Staff lacked understanding of people’s communication and sensory needs, which meant that people didn’t receive compassionate or empowering care that was tailored to their preferences or requirements.
Staff didn’t support people to have the maximum possible choice and control over their lives. The least restrictive options weren’t always taken by staff, so that people’s freedoms were restricted without alternatives being considered. For example, people couldn’t move freely around their home as some internal doors were kept locked, without considering other options to safely manage any risks.
People weren’t consistently supported to pursue interests or develop skills. One person told CQC how they didn’t get to see their friends, while others said they couldn’t go to the gym, visit the cinema, or take part in other activities they enjoyed.
However, people received kind and well-meaning care from staff. The premises were clean and hygienic, and the service used effective infection prevention and control measures to keep people safe from the risk of infection.
People were encouraged to eat a healthy and balanced diet, and religious and cultural beliefs were respected.