What the CQC found at John Masefield House

The home carried out police checks and obtained references before staff started work.

“The provider completed police checks and gained references for staff prior to them starting work.” from the report

Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices where possible, with best-interest decisions recorded when needed.

“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report

People said they were treated with dignity during personal care, including when staff helped with washing and dressings.

“People felt they were treated with dignity and respect during care tasks.” from the report

People and relatives gave positive feedback about the food and said it had improved with the newer chef.

“The food has certainly improved since the new chef arrived.” from the report

The provider collected views from people, relatives, staff and other organisations, although inspectors found that feedback was not always acted on.

“The provider had sought the views of people using the service, their families, staff and stakeholders.” from the report

Care plans and risk assessments did not always contain clear, current guidance. Inspectors found risks involving choking, aspiration, falls, pressure damage and moving and handling.

“Practice at the service placed people at risk of harm.” from the report

There were not always enough suitably skilled staff. People waited for help with meals and call bells were sometimes answered without the required support being provided.

“Most people required support with eating their meals at lunchtime. We observed people having to wait a considerable time until care staff were free to support them with their meals.” from the report

Records about repositioning, weights, equipment, food and fluids and regular checks were incomplete. Audits had identified problems, but these were still not fixed months later.

“The provider had not effectively operated their systems and processes designed to mitigate risks to people.” from the report

People did not always receive activities suited to their interests, and some could not access community activities because transport was not adapted. Physiotherapy had not been provided since November 2022.

“We don't really have activities. We do a lot of colouring, don't get asked what we might like to do” from the report

Some people, relatives and staff reported difficulty understanding or being understood by some internationally recruited staff. The home had not fully met the required communication standard.

“People told us that they struggled to always understand or be understood when communicating with the internationally recruited staff.” from the report

Some creams were not applied at the prescribed frequency, and inspectors saw staff entering a room where someone had a stomach infection without gloves or aprons.

“Some medicines such as barrier creams were applied by care staff and records of application were recorded on records in people's rooms.” from the report