Gorton Parks 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

Following this assessment, we found breaches of regulations in relation to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing. The provider had failed to rectify several improvements highlighted as part of an internal audit in January 2024. At this assessment, we continued to find similar themes. Weekly and monthly internal audits were not effective in identifying areas for improvement. The provider had made a decision to reduce management and staffing levels without considering the quality and safety of people living at the home. Although staffing levels were increased during the assessment, staff told us they had continually fed back their concerns about staffing levels and were not listened to.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There was a lack of shared direction and culture across the home. There had been 3 managers in post in the last 12 months and this had affected staff morale. Staff had not received regular supervision or been given the opportunity to attend regular staff meetings. Staffing levels had been remodelled and reduced twice within under 18 months despite staff telling us they had continually raised concerns around people’s safety and staffing levels. The number of senior staff and managers had been reduced without evidence the reduction would not affect people’s safety. There had become a culture of acceptance across some of the houses with no one acknowledging the condition of some of the décor and bedroom furniture and how this affected people’s safety. There was a lack of concern when people were not being able to eat their lunch while it was hot and where people lay in their bed with the door open, partially exposed and in a position which risked their skin integrity.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Since the last inspection, there had been several changes to the management structure of the home, and it was evident this had impacted on managers and leaders having oversight of each house. At the time of the assessment, there was a new home manager in post, a new deputy manager and a unit coordinator. This had been reduced from a home manager, a head of care, 2 clinical leads and 4-unit managers. Staffing levels had been reduced by 16 – 18 hours per day across all houses with no evidence to support this change. We observed and staff told us, they were responsible for serving meals and washing and drying the dishes which impacted on the supporting people at mealtimes. This was addressed following the assessment and care staffing levels were increased on Abbey Hey House, Melland House and Debdale House and ancillary staff were drafted in to support the mealtimes. There was also ongoing recruitment to recruit 2 new clinical leads for the home. There had been several changes to the operational directors since the last inspection. A new team of directors have been recruited and have commenced employment with Advinia Care Homes Ltd in 2024 and staff told us this had been unsettling. Some staff told us they were responsible for care record reviews as well as some audits, but they did not always have the time to complete them. We saw the reviews of care records were not always capturing the changes to people’s needs and lacked people and their relatives’ inputs. We were not assured staff had been given the correct training and support to understand and embed auditing processes. For example, some care plan audits recorded care and support for medicines management was in place, but we found the care plans lacked guidance for how people should be supported to take their medicines.

Governance arrangements were not always effective to assess, identify, monitor and improve the home. There had been a lack of provider oversight with the last multi-site audit being completed in January 2024 which rated the home as “Major requires improvement” and gave an overall score of 65.38%. There had been a change in the directors of the home which had impacted on any timely action being taken. However, the audit had identified more urgent actions were required to be taken which included redecoration, cleaning, fixing call bells, fixing drawers and wardrobes and improving the content of care records. The audit recorded multiple examples of a failure to provide person-centred care to people and we were not assured action had been taken to ensure those people had been effectively supported. Some weekly and monthly audits were being rated as compliant which was incorrect as we found a care plan audit had recorded all care plans and risk assessments as completed but no risk assessment had been completed. We also found audits repeatedly identified staff were not completing wound care records appropriately and improvement were not being made in a timely manner. The home received support from the local authority compliance team who had conducted their own review of the service in May 2024 and had provided the home with actions to complete, however, we found many of the findings continued to be a cause for concern following our assessment of the home.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.