Bedford care home staff see physical injuries as ‘part of the job’, say watchdog inspectors
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has criticised The Crown care home and has again given it an overall rating of ‘requires improvement’.
The health watchdog visited the residential care home for adults either with a learning disability or autism on two occasions in January and February – but has only this month revealed its findings.
Following the visits, it gave the specialist service in Britannia Road an ‘inadequate’ rating for safety and a ‘requires improvement’ rating for the categories of effective, caring, responsive and whether the service is well-led. It also said The Crown had three breaches of legal regulations.
And this follows from a previous damning report in January 2024.
At the time of publishing, the home – run by Alex Davis (Bedford) Ltd – has yet to comment.
Inspectors said: “The service did not demonstrate they had learnt and improved from our previous inspection.”
Here are the key findings listed by inspectors
>The CQC found staff had experienced physical injuries and viewed these incidents as “part of the job”
>Inspectors discovered unplanned restraint was being used without appropriate planning or safeguards
>Topical medicines were found with illegible pharmacy labels
>There were unsecured wardrobes in bedrooms and hot radiators without covers
>Inaccuracies in care records, and environmental risks, had not been recognised or challenged by leaders
>Management and leadership was inconsistent
>The provider did not always promote the wellbeing of their staff
>There were not always enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff on shift
>The provider did not always treat people as individuals
Plus, inspectors were unhappy about the risk of infection, especially the chance of Legionnaires disease.
The report said: “We found a dirty and scaled showerhead and water temperature records were not completed despite being required in the provider’s legionella risk assessment.”
However staff did tell inspectors they felt able to raise concerns and would be listened to and inspectors saw positive interactions, with staff showing kindness.
People were also supported to make choices about their daily lives.
The inspectors said: “For example, one person became distressed at times, and staff understood that visiting local charity shops helped reduce this distress.”