'˜Multiple safeguarding issues' found at Bracklesham care home
Another damning report from inspectors has seen an '˜unsafe' care home placed into special measures.
‘Multiple safeguarding issues’ at Hooklands Care Home in Bracklesham Bay put ‘the majority of people who lived there at risk of harm or poor care’.
That is according to a Care Quality Commission report, rating the home ‘inadequate’.
West Sussex County Council is reviewing the safety of the 19 people living there, ten of whom have dementia, and have suspended people being placed there.
Owners Hooklands Limited said significant improvements had been made since the inspection.
During an earlier CQC visit in January, five breaches of regulations were identified and the home was rated ‘requires improvement’.
Following new inspections in August, a CQC report, published September 29, states: “At this inspection we found that improvements had taken place with regards to recruitment practices and consent to care.
“However, insufficient action had been taken and a further deterioration had taken place in relation to safe care and treatment, staff training and support, and, good governance.
“Also, new concerns were identified in relation to the environment, safeguarding, staffing levels and statutory notifications and breaches of regulations were identified in these areas.”
It said records from January to July showed 14 people had suffered falls but ‘action was not always taken to minimise the chance of reoccurrence’.
During the inspection ‘eight of the 19 people...remained in bed all day...in the same position for eight hours’.
In a statement Hooklands Ltd said: “Since the inspection we have made significant improvements and continue to develop the service.
“We have additional support from specialist external care consultants and we continue to work closely with the local authority and the Care Quality Commission.”
CDC inspectors found no sensory devices to alert staff if people fell in the home, referrals to external professionals had not been made and risk assessments and care plans ‘were either not in place or incomplete for people who were at risk of choking’.
“We identified multiple safeguarding concerns that placed the majority of people who lived at the home at risk of harm or poor care,” the CQC report said.
It added: “Despite the poor staff morale we saw that they were dedicated and tried to ensure people received a caring service.”
The home will be inspected again in six months, and if significant improvements are not made the operator could have its registration cancelled.