The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has rated Bloomsbury House in Sutton Coldfield, inadequate, and placed it in special measures to protect people following an inspection in November.
Bloomsbury House, run by Senex Limited, provides personal care for up to 24 people, some of whom are living with dementia.
The inspection was prompted by concerns received about how people were supported with moving and handling, how their health needs were managed and how people with dementia were being supported.
Following the inspection, the overall rating for the home is inadequate, as well as the areas of safe, effective, and well-led. Caring and responsive are rated requires improvement. The service was previously rated requires improvement overall, and for being safe and well-led, and good for effective, responsive, and caring.
The service has been placed in special measures which means it will be kept under close review to make sure people are safe and, if CQC do not propose to cancel the provider's registration, there will be a re-inspection to check for significant improvements.
Amanda Lyndon, CQC deputy director of operations in the midlands, said:
“When we inspected Bloomsbury House, it was disappointing that leaders still hadn’t addressed our previous areas of concern which placed people at a continued risk of harm.
“At our previous inspection, we found ineffective systems to reduce risks to people, such as ensuring referrals to health professionals were made. We asked the provider to send us monthly reports telling us how they’d make improvements, and whilst the reports received indicated improvements had been made, we found the same areas of concern at this inspection which is unacceptable.
“External healthcare professionals told us that communication with Bloomsbury House was poor, and they were concerned about how people were being monitored and supported.
“For example, it was concerning that two allegations of physical abuse towards people in the home hadn’t been investigated properly or reported to the local authority safeguarding team which put people at risk of ongoing harm in a place they call home.
“We have told leaders where we expect to see rapid, widespread improvements and will continue to monitor the home closely to keep people safe during this time. We will return to check on their progress and won’t hesitate to take further action if people aren’t receiving the care they have a right to expect.”
Inspectors found:
- People's preferences and needs weren’t always fully considered and met
- Some people spent long periods without any social interaction
- Medicines weren’t always safely managed
- People's independence and ability to make personal choices weren’t always respected
- Some equipment in bathrooms was soiled and there were shortfalls in infection control measures in the premises
- Not all staff had received up to date training in a range of relevant subjects.
However:
- The kitchen staff had a clear system for recording people's dietary requirements and had good knowledge of people's likes and dislikes
- People and relatives told us staff treated them well and were kind and caring
- The service had an established staff team, with many working at Bloomsbury House for several years, meaning people were supported by staff who knew them well.