Luton care home handed formal warning after regulator inspection
A care home in Luton has been told it must improve in all areas after being handed a warning by the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
Moorland Gardens Care Home, just off of Old Bedford Road, was inspected by the regulator in January and February, and at the time, was caring for 63 older people.
The home, run by Bondcare London Limited, looks after people with dementia, physical disabilities and nursing needs. Inspectors found breaches of four legal regulations regarding safe care and treatment, safeguarding, dignity, and governance.
A spokesperson for Moorland Gardens Care Home “The safety, wellbeing and dignity of our residents remain our highest priority, and we are working closely with the CQC, local partners and our staff team to ensure all recommendations are fully implemented and embedded into daily practice.
“We are committed to continuous improvement and have adopted a clear action plan to strengthen governance, oversight and quality of care across the service.”
The report, published this month, found that safeguarding concerns had not always been identified or reported.
Inspectors said: “Incidents where people experienced emotional distress, were not always recognised, appropriately documented or reviewed to inform learning.
“People’s care plans and risk assessments were not always accurate or detailed enough, this meant staff did not consistently have the guidance they needed to support people safely.”
The home was criticised for not always respecting the wishes of its residents.
The report stated: “We observed people did not always receive care that promoted their dignity or comfort, and we observed examples where people’s expressed wishes were not listened to or acted upon.”
Despite this, most people and relatives told the CQC they felt safe and well supported and described the staff as kind, with relatives saying the atmosphere in the home was friendly and welcoming.
There were mixed findings of how people were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity.
Inspectors explained: “For example, on our first day of inspection, we heard a person become distressed while receiving personal care.
“The person repeatedly called out, ‘help me,’ said the water was cold, and stated clearly that they did not want the care to continue.”
Staff reportedly did not offer reassurance, explanation or comfort, and carried on while the person was distressed.
But the CQC said: “However, we also observed positive interactions such as people being supported to eat and drink with kindness and gentle redirection when people were experiencing disorientation.
“A relative told us, ‘They always transfer my loved one to the bedroom so we can have some privacy.’”
The provider was described as being receptive to the regulator’s feedback and took immediate action during the assessment.