Bankfield House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We assessed all quality statements in the well-led key question and found poor governance and oversight at the service. We found breaches of 5 regulations in total during this inspection and we issued the provide with a warning notice for failure to ensure audits and other systems for checking the quality of the service are contemporaneous, robust and effective enough to ensure compliance with regulations and to identify and action shortfalls in the provision of safe care. The management team completed checks and audits of the service, however these auditing systems were not effective in improving care and ensuring people’s safety. Feedback from people had not been sought and used to improve the service, prior to our site visits. The provider had not securely maintained accurate and up to date records in respect of each person using the service. Staff shared positive feedback about the management team.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We asked the home manager to send us a statement relating to their aspirations for the service and what they were proud of; however, we did not receive this information. The home manager told us they understood their responsibilities relating to duty of candour; they told us they would be honest if an incident occurred and would be open with staff and families when untoward things happened. However, we were not assured of transparency at the service when incidents occurred.

We received positive feedback about the new management team from staff and visitors. Staff and one visiting professional told us they felt improvements were being introduced to the way the home was run. Improvements at the home due to the new management team will need to embed and be sustained. We will review the effectiveness of he new management team at the next inspection.

We received positive feedback from staff in relation to the management team and the provider. Staff felt supported and one staff member commented about the home manager, “The whole atmosphere has changed since [home manager] has been here, for the better.”

The new home manager was visible around the home and was getting know the service and the people living at Bankfield House. They told us they had told staff if they saw anything they were unsure of they were to report it to them and they would investigate. However, we found we were not assured that incidents were thoroughly reported and investigated.

Staff told us they felt able to raise concerns and felt confident action would be taken as a result of reporting incidents. All staff we spoke with told us they had no concerns about the care delivered at the home.

The home manager told us there was a policy and procedure in place for staff to whistleblow and report abuse. The home manager told us they had not had any recent formal complaints about the home or people’s care. We did not find any information displayed in the home for people and visitors to inform them of the complaint procedure and how they could raise concerns. Although the home manager told us they would investigate any concerns, we were not assured that incidents were always fully investigated.

Staff told us they were welcomed into the team and they felt supported in their role. There was an equality and diversity policy in place to support staff.

The management team told us staff completed equality and diversity training and they employed and supported a diverse workforce.

The management team told us about the audits and checks that were carried out at the home to assess the safety and quality of care and support delivery to people at Bankfield House. However, we found these were not always effective or carried out as required.

Quality checks and audits were inconsistent and not robust, and they had not identified or actioned the concerns found on this inspection leading to a breach of regulation relating to the governance of the service. We have identified a total of 5 breaches of regulations during this inspection relating to safety, nutrition and hydration, person-centred care, safeguarding people and governance of the home. This inspection identified the service requires improvement in all domains.

People told us they would like more involvement and activities at the home.

The home manager told us they worked closely with the local authority and had recently had a visit that was positive. The home manager told us they had plans to involve people in the community; however, there was nothing in place at the time of the inspection in terms of community involvement in the home. We will review any community involvement by the new management team at our next inspection.

The service engaged well with the local authority and feedback from them was they felt improvements were being made at the home. However, these improvements will need to be embedded, monitored and sustained by the new management team and provider.

The home manager engaged with other agencies such as local safeguarding, mental health services and district nurse teams. However, we were not assured that timely and appropriate referrals were always made to other healthcare professionals when necessary.

The home manager told us that when things happen at the service, they held their hands up and ensured they are honest and truthful. However, our findings on this inspection meant that we were not assured that incidents and concerns were always appropriately investigated and actions taken to mitigate further incidents.

We did not see evidence of a robust system in place to ensure the effective review of safety concerns, incidents and safeguardings. We were not assured that all incidents were reported and investigated fully. We were not assured that previous concerns identified and raised led to continuous improvement and learning shared across the home. This placed people at the risk of harm and we were not assured people were always safe from the risk of safety incidents.