Wolston care home calls inspector's report 'harsh' after receiving CQC rating of inadequate

Image: Google Streetview.
Image: Google Streetview.

A care home near Wolston branded a Care Quality Commission inspector's report 'harsh' after receiving a rating of inadequate in a recent inspection.

Wolston Grange, owned by Pinnacle Care, supports those with dementia or mental health requirements, and after an inspection conducted by the CQC in February it was rated ‘inadequete’ in the categories of ‘safe’ and ‘well-led’.

Pinnacle Care operates four other care facilities in the Rugby area, three of which have 'good' CQC ratings and one has 'requires improvement'.

Amber Bond, marketing manager for Pinnacle Care and previously the manager of Wolston Grange, said: “We’re a family run business, we’re not a big corporate company, and I was involved in the inspection, as was our area manager and our new manager.

"I think we’re all quite shocked to receive the inspection report as it was.

"It was quite harsh, but we took on board some of the points and we’ve made quite a lot of improvements already that were required.

"If you only see some of the regulatory things you don't actually see a lot of the positives."

For the categories named, ‘effective’, ‘caring’ and ‘responsive’, the Coalpit Lane home received a rating of ‘requires improvement’ – which, taken with the two other ‘inadequate’ categories, gives the home an overall ‘inadequate’ rating.

Among the key issues highlighted by the inspection report, published in March, were:

The general décor and maintenance throughout the service was poor and posed risks of injury to people because repairs were required. This included repairs to interior woodwork and window restrictors. Because of the overall disrepair of some areas of the home, this presented potential infection control risks.

Systems to identify people’s individual safety risks and to promote people’s safety within the home environment were not effective.

No action had been taken when health and safety checks identified people could be exposed to unnecessary risk, such as potential scalds from excessive hot water temperatures.

Fire safety measures had been taken following a fire authority visit in 2017, however staff responsible to check fire equipment such as doors and emergency lighting had not been trained.

Where fire safety equipment was recorded as not working, this equipment remained defective.

Medicines were not always managed and administered in a safe way which increased risks to people’s health and wellbeing. Systems to store, record and dispose of medicines safely were inadequate.

Amber Bond said: “Once you’ve got an inspection report it’s not a quick change, you can’t just get the rating changed like that. So we are hoping they will be reinspecting us within the summer if not sooner, and that it will return to a rating of ‘good’.”

She said she feels the inspector did not focus enough on feedback from residents and families, adding that such feedback is positive. She said the rating was largely a result of recent changes to the criteria.

The CQC report states: "In the last two months, the provider had undertaken a quality assurance survey but the results were not yet completed and analysed.

"Questionnaires had been completed by people living at the service, professional visitors and relatives.

"The marketing manager [Amber Bond] told us results recorded a high satisfaction rate across the service. The level of satisfaction reported was not reflected by our findings during our inspection visit."

In 2012 the Advertiser published a story after the CQC raised concerns over the standard of care at the home.

Click here to view the full report.