What the CQC found at Fourways Residential Home

Inspectors saw staff provide kind and compassionate care. People and relatives said staff treated them with dignity and took a genuine interest in their wellbeing.

“Despite being rushed at times, staff were observed to be kind and caring with people.” from the report

People and relatives were involved in decisions and care planning. Their choices were respected by staff.

“People and relatives consistently told us they were fully involved in decisions about all aspects of people's care and support.” from the report

Staff had completed core training, induction and competency checks. Further training had been arranged after recent incidents and other identified risks.

“The manager and deputy manager operated a system of training, competency assessments, supervision and appraisals.” from the report

Healthcare professionals told inspectors that referrals were appropriate and timely. Staff worked with professionals on pressure area care and other health needs.

“Visiting healthcare professionals told us the managers had made appropriate and timely referrals and had acted swiftly on their recommendations.” from the report

Staff did not always recognise or respond promptly to illness and other risks. One person needed medical attention after inspectors identified an infection and prompted staff to seek help.

“This placed the person at high risk of harm from an untreated condition.” from the report

Inspectors found delays in answering call bells and providing personal care. Night staffing also meant there was no provision for some as-required medicines during the night.

“Insufficient staff were deployed which placed people at risk of harm and delayed care.” from the report

Medicines were sometimes late or given at the wrong time. Records were incomplete, and it was not always clear whether medicines had been administered.

“People were at risk from unsafe medicines administration.” from the report

Inspectors found poor use and storage of protective equipment, inadequate hand hygiene, cleaning problems and a high legionella reading without a suitable risk assessment. Fire arrangements and some parts of the building were also unsafe.

“People were not always protected from the risks of infection.” from the report

There was no activities coordinator and little evidence of outings or meaningful activities. Staff were often focused on tasks and did not always offer choices about food, drink or activities.

“There was a lack of social stimulation for people, and they mostly stayed in their bedroom, sat in a small lounge, or walked about.” from the report

The home's checks did not reliably identify or manage risks. Concerns raised by staff about unsafe staffing levels had not been acted on.

“Quality assurance processes had not always effectively identified emerging risks to people and ensured they were managed safely.” from the report