Broadland House Residential Care Home

Ratings

• Overall

  Requires improvement

• Safe

  Requires improvement

• Effective

  Requires improvement

• Caring

  Requires improvement

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Date of inspection: 20 January to 03 February 2025. The service is a residential care home providing support to older people living with dementia. At the start of this inspection, 18 people were using the service and this increased to 19 before the inspection was concluded.

We found the service to be in breach of 4 legal regulations relating to risk management, person-centred care, staffing, and governance. The provider was previously in breach of the regulations relating to risk management and governance. Improvements were not found at this inspection, and the provider remains in breach of these 2 regulations.

People were not consistently protected from the risk of harm. For example, the provider had failed to take complete action to meet a gas warning notice which had remained in place for 2 years leading up to this inspection. Additionally, people had not always received their medicines as prescribed. We also found there were not enough staff to ensure people received consistent person-centered and safe care. Furthermore, the governance systems the provider had in place had failed to identify and rectify the shortfalls found at this inspection.

However, staff knew people’s needs well and were observed delivering care that was kind and respectful. The service worked well with professionals and people’s relatives told us they were involved in their family member’s care. The service had a positive culture and staff were dedicated to providing the best level of care they could. This had, however, been impacted by staffing levels meaning staff were not always able to deliver this.

In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.

People's experience of this service

The people who used the service were not always able to tell us about their experiences. However , we spoke with the relatives of some people who used the service and used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI), a framework for directly observing and reporting on the quality of care experienced by people who may not be able to describe this themselves. Whilst most people expressed general satisfaction with the care delivered, our inspection found elements of care and support that did not meet expected standards.

For example, staffing levels did not ensure people received person-centred care at all times; our observations confirmed this and some relatives agreed. For example, a relative told us there were ‘just enough’ staff whilst another said, “Sometimes there are waits of perhaps 3-5 minutes for call bells to be answered. So there are enough staff to meet the needs but more would be needed to actually sit and chat to people for a few minutes. Staff are very busy and sometimes they are really rushing around.”

The people we spoke with consistently raised concerns about the lack of activities and stimulation for people. A relative said, “There’s not much going on” and this was confirmed by our observations. Relatives also had mixed opinions on the care home environment with some describing this as ‘basic’ although all agreed it was clean. For example, a relative said, “I would say it’s tatty and could be updated; the décor is shabby.”

However, relatives told us staff were good at involving them in their family member’s care and that their health needs were met. They told us staff were kind and caring and that they communicated well with them as family members. We had mixed opinions on whether relatives would recommend the home however they did agree that the service was homely and that staff were caring.