Cherrycroft

Updated 4 June 2024

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection, we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by 2 inspectors.

Service and service type

Cherrycroft is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. Cherrycroft is a care home without nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post. However, they were not available during the inspection. A Chief operations officer and the previous manager were present during the inspection.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

Inspection activity started on 6 December 2023 and ended on 22 December 2023. We visited the location on 6 and 12 December 2023.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 3 people and 5 of their relatives about their experience of using the service. We spoke with 7 members of staff including the interim chief operations officer, the previous manager and support workers. We reviewed a range of records. This included 6 people's care records and 5 people's medicine administration records. We looked at 4 staff files in relation to recruitment, training and supervision. A variety of other records relating to the management of the service, including audits were also reviewed.

Updated 4 June 2024

Cherrycroft is a care home for up to ten people. The service supports people with learning disabilities, and mental health needs. At the time of our inspection ten people were using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Right Support:

People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.

Staffing levels were insufficient in Cherrycroft to enable people to fully pursue their leisure interests and form meaningful relationships within their local community. The management team could not demonstrate how people’s 1 to1 hours were being used. Whilst some people could access the community, there was a lack of information on people's care files about how people’s' goals and aspirations where identified, planned for and met.

Risk plans were not always updated or reviewed in a timely way. Minor improvements were required with medicines management. Effective systems were not in place to ensure there was learning from events which occurred at the service.

The environment was not always safe or clean. Health and safety checks were not being consistently completed.

Right Care:

Whilst staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. We could not be assured potential safeguarding incidents were recorded or reported to the local safeguarding team.

The service did not have enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. The training matrix provided demonstrated there were large shortfalls in staff refresher training.

Care was not always person centred, care records did not reflect people's goals and outcomes. Staff supervision was not up to date.

Right Culture:

People did not always receive good quality care, support and treatment. Management of the service was not effective, safety records and monitoring records which were not up to date.

Staff knew and understood people well but were not supported to enable people to meet their aspirations to live a quality life of their choosing. Audits had not been used effectively to identify and drive improvements and some relatives told us they had lost faith in the management at the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 13 January 2022)

Why we inspected

We received concerns in relation to staffing, medicines, risk, safeguarding, and governance. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe, effective and well-led only. Due to the concerns found we widened the scope of the inspection to a comprehensive inspection which included all key questions.

The overall rating for the service has changed from good to inadequate based on the findings of this inspection.

Enforcement

We have identified breaches in relation to staffing, staff training, risk, safeguarding, dignity and privacy, consent and governance at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Full information about CQC’s regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.

If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe and there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions the registration.

For adult social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it, and it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.