Cedardale Residential Home

Ratings

• Overall

  Inadequate

• Safe

  Inadequate

• Effective

  Requires improvement

• Caring

  Requires improvement

• Responsive

  Requires improvement

• Well-led

  Inadequate

Our view of the service

Cedardale is a residential care home without nursing, providing accommodation and personal care to up to 29 people. At the time of the assessment there were 25 people living at the service, some people were living dementia. We carried out this assessment on 24 and 26 September 2024. We found people were not always treated with dignity, and respect, and people were not always protected from risks to their health and wellbeing. The service was highly odorous in parts, and we found parts of the service, including one person’s room was not clean. There was a lack of robust governance and oversight to make positive changes within the service. We found significant shortfalls across the service and identified 7 breaches of regulation including, providing people with person centred care, dignity and respect, need for consent, safe care and treatment, staffing, safeguarding and good governance. We took urgent action to prevent the provider from taking further care packages without the written agreement of CQC. We placed conditions on the provider’s registration for them to send us action plans advising us how they planned to improve the service. This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we user our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.

People's experience of this service

People and their relatives gave us mixed feedback about their care and support. Whilst people were generally happy about the care they received, some people told us they were lonely, and there was a lack of individual support or activities for people. Some practices were not dignified, for example, the way staff spoke about people, and how and when staff photographed a person’s injuries following a fall. The environment was not dementia friendly. Risks to people had not always been mitigated, for example, when people could become distressed.