The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has rated Broomhill in Spratton, Northampton, inadequate, and placed it in special measures to protect people following an inspection last year.
Broomhill, run by St Matthews Limited, provides care, treatment, and support to people with mental health needs. This inspection included one acute ward and five rehabilitation wards.
This unannounced inspection was carried out to check previous action plans had been progressed, as well as to assess ongoing concerns received from whistleblowers and other enquiries. In addition, the provider had requested a re-inspection, as not all of the hospital had been inspected since February 2020. The main concerns related to the quality of care and treatment, as well as safeguarding concerns.
Following the inspection, the overall rating for the hospital dropped from requires improvement to inadequate. The ratings for safe, responsive, caring and well-led also declined from requires improvement to inadequate. It has again been re-rated inadequate for being effective.
The service has been placed in special measures which means it will be kept under close review to make sure people are safe and there will be a re-inspection to check for significant improvements.
Craig Howarth, CQC deputy director of operations in the midlands, said:
“When we inspected Broomhill, we found the provider still didn’t have effective processes in place to be able to have sufficient oversight of the significant issues in many areas of the hospital. Some of these issues had already been raised at previous inspections.
“For example, we found staff didn’t always ensure people were protected from harm and safeguarded from abuse. People using the services were assaulting each other, and managers weren’t dealing with this appropriately. It was worrying that people told us they didn’t always feel safe on the wards. They also told us they didn’t receive any updates after incidents to let them know what action had been taken to make them feel safe or prevent it from happening again.
“Staff didn’t always treat people with compassion and kindness, dignity, or respect. A third of people we spoke to, told us that they had to wait to have their needs met. One person told us they had been ridiculed by staff over their chosen gender. Another person told us staff were rude, hateful, racist and didn’t take them out into the community because of their body size. This is totally unacceptable behaviour and must be addressed by the provider as a priority as no-one deserves to be treat like this especially at what can be a very distressing time.
“It’s concerning the hospital has a history of failing to respond adequately to serious concerns raised by us. While leaders do submit action plans to address the issues, we find these actions aren’t always sustained or embedded which could put people at risk of harm.
“However, following this inspection last July, the provider has informed us they have made some improvements, and they have engaged positively with us, and local health and social care partners in response to the concerns raised. The provider has also developed an action plan with the support of NHS Northamptonshire Integrated Care Board and NHS England, and we will review the impact this has had when we re-visit the service.
“If sufficient progress hasn’t been made next time we assess the hospital, we won’t hesitate to use our enforcement powers to ensure people’s safety and well-being.”
Inspectors found:
- Staff failed to ensure that all corridors were kept clear of hazards to enable safe exit from ward areas in the case of emergency
- Staff had not fully risk assessed activities on the ward including potential risks relating to other people. Electrical equipment was placed on the floor and staff had not fully risk assessed this issue. There were plastic bags in a drawer on one ward which people could use to harm themselves
- Staff were not routinely offering people regular access to activities that promoted rehabilitation such as employment and education opportunities
- Staff had not always followed best practice after administration of rapid tranquillisation regarding the monitoring and recording of physical observations
- There were limited rooms for use as quiet areas on some wards. Wards had limited space for people to meet visitors in private
- Staff had not always made sure that people were fully involved in the development and ongoing monitoring of their care plans.
However:
- The ward teams included or had access to, the full range of specialists needed to meet the needs of people on the wards
- Staff had developed care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. This was an improvement on previous inspection findings.