CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Poplars Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Poplars Care Centre was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe gaps in care records and weaknesses in checks, despite kind staff and safe medicines management.
This was an unannounced inspection after concerns about inconsistencies in people's care records. Two inspectors visited or reviewed records off site. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management audits.
The main concern was that some care records were inaccurate, incomplete or did not explain how to support people's specific needs. Errors could have led to unsafe care, including confusion about a person's diabetes treatment and missing guidance for using a hoist. The provider's checks had not found or corrected these problems.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, and also Requires Improvement for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, infection control measures and kind care. Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected at this visit, so their previous ratings were used.
Kind staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed people appearing relaxed and comfortable with them.
“People spoke fondly of the staff supporting them.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were given by trained nurses whose competence had been checked. Records, storage and guidance for medicines used when needed were found to be safe.
“People received their medicines safely, from nurses that had been trained and had their competency assessed.” from the report
Staffing
The home used people's needs and a dependency tool to monitor staffing. Inspectors found enough nurses and care staff to meet people's needs.
“There were enough nurses and care staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about measures including protective equipment, testing, social distancing, hygiene and managing possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inaccurate care records
seriousSome records contained conflicting, incomplete or out-of-date information. This included incorrect diabetes information, missing hoist instructions and a catheter need that no longer applied.
“Failure to ensure people care records were accurate and complete placed people at risk of harm.” from the report
Checks did not find problems
needs fixingCare records were reviewed and audits were carried out, but the problems found by inspectors had not been identified or corrected.
“The provider's programme of checks and audits were not always effective in identifying and addressing the shortfalls we found within people's care records.” from the report
Mixed views of leadership
needs fixingPeople, relatives and staff had different views about management and leadership. The report also noted staff turnover and concerns about how equally the manager interacted with staff.
“There were mixed views about the management and leadership of the service.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that care records are accurate, complete and updated when a person's needs change?
- 02What safeguards are in place to make sure emergency hospital passports do not contain conflicting health information?
- 03How will you make sure staff have clear instructions for moving and handling, catheter care and supporting communication needs?
- 04What action has been taken to improve the audits that failed to identify the care record problems?
- 05What progress has been made on the improvements promised after this Requires Improvement rating?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but saw staff enter bedrooms without knocking and found complaint information was not accessible.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 27 February 2020. They spoke with 11 people, two relatives and 12 staff. They also observed care and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, safety and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, good health support and care plans that had been reviewed. People generally described staff as kind, caring and respectful.
There were some shortfalls. Staff were seen entering bedrooms without knocking, and some people did not know how to complain. The home corrected the complaints information shortly after the inspection. The previous Requires Improvement rating improved to Good, and the earlier breach about medicines was no longer in place.
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered by trained nurses, stored securely and recorded accurately. Checks and audits were used to identify problems.
“Medicines were managed consistently and safely in line with national guidance.” from the report
Kind staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed warm, friendly communication and said staff knew people's needs and interests.
“Staff displayed kindness and understanding towards people and addressed them by their preferred names.” from the report
Health and nutrition support
The home assessed people's food and drink needs, monitored people at risk and made referrals when needed. Staff also worked with health professionals.
“People's nutrition and hydration needs had been assessed.” from the report
Personalised care
People and relatives were involved in care planning. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed and updated when needed.
“People and their loved ones had been involved in the on going review of their care.” from the report
Improvement after the last inspection
The previous inspection found a breach about medicines. Inspectors found enough improvement for the home no longer to be in breach of that regulation.
“Enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 12.” from the report
Privacy at bedroom doors
minorInspectors saw staff enter people's bedrooms without knocking first. This did not match the privacy and dignity practice described by staff.
“However, despite the positive feedback we observed staff entering people's bedrooms without knocking.” from the report
Making complaints
needs fixingThe complaints procedure was not in an accessible format and some people did not know who to speak to. An accessible poster was displayed after the inspection.
“People told us they did not always know who to speak to if they had a complaint.” from the report
Staffing pressure
minorSome people felt staff were rushed and did not have enough time to spend with them. Inspectors found enough staff overall, but the manager planned to observe care delivery further.
“some people said they felt there were enough staff and others said, staff were rushed and did not have time to spend with them.” from the report
Management notification
needs fixingThe change in manager had not been formally notified to CQC as required. There was no registered manager at the time of the inspection.
“A statutory notification for this change had not been submitted to the CQC in line with their regulatory responsibility.” from the report
- 01How do staff make sure they knock and wait before entering residents' bedrooms?
- 02How are residents given the complaints procedure in a format they can understand?
- 03Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and has the manager's CQC registration been completed?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels remain sufficient when staff are absent or the home is full?
- 05What is the current position on the outstanding DoLS applications mentioned in the report?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection that looked at the care home, its premises and care, and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Poplars Care Centre
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- May 2021Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.